Jernik
New member
So why don't we hear about "assault bombs", "assault knives", "assault bats", "assault cars", or "assault fists"?
Orlando Attack...ISIS claims it!
- Thread starter Thai
- Start date
So why don't we hear about "assault bombs", "assault knives", "assault bats", "assault cars", or "assault fists"?
wadle5
New member
ar-15 is not a rebranded m16. . it cannot LEGALLY be made into a full auto. It is NOT designed to kill people.
Those are the common misconceptions I spoke of.
Assault rifles are already illegal.
nevada
Senior Member
you are missing the point. people just like YOU, that dismiss, and disregard the truth will help to get guns banned.
assault is an action. any weapon can be used in that manner.
it seems as though the actual definition varies depending on who you ask. those wanting to ban guns include "semi-auto" in the "assault rifle" criteria.
there also seems to be confusion between the terms assault rifle, and assault weapon.
the term "assault rifle" is used loosely, specifically as a derogatory term to help feed anti-gun bias.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
for someone not wanting to get rid of guns, I would refer to these for a proper definition.
The Truth About Assault Weapons
When You Hear Someone Call an AR-15 an Assault Rifle, Show Them This | Tribunist
why? because the media tells you it is?
because it LOOKS a certain way? because that is truly the only difference between it, and MANY other guns that do not get called an assault rifle.
why is that?
Zonie Taco
New member
damn, sure struck a nerve with you guys over calling it an assault rifle. so sensitive lol. its like the goddamn word police.
Bigshankhank
New member
With all due respect, I will wait until I am not at work before I click on links specifically about firearms (although I am clearly cool with automotive forums :banana
I believe you directed the trailing questions at me? If not then its just my ego talking but I'll go ahead and answer anyway;
I made the point that my definition has nothing to do with the appearance of the firearm. Further, I can assure you that my distaste for the current state of "media" is pretty high, so I can safely say I do not take their word at face value. What makes a weapon one that is designed for assault rather than sport or hunting in my mind? Rounds per minute. It has nothing to do with whether the action is semi or full auto. Beyond a certain point, and no I am not about to try and define that number, the rounds per minute cross over from being merely a sporting or defensive weapon and go to being one designed for offense/assault. As I said, I have not followed the links you posted but I intend to, however I would be wiling to bet that the individual or organization who wrote the definition you stated have a vested interest in keeping the AR off of the banned "assault" weapons list. A more neutral party without "skin in the game" as it were, would be better able (with proper research) to provide an accurate definition.
But hey, that's my opinion.
Zonie Taco
New member
wasnt trying to make it sound scary. its just what i call it. i'd be happy to call it a gun if it makes everyone feel better. so i restate my only real point here that 'guns' shouldnt be sold to suspected terrorists. and if the fbi watch list is too easy to get on then that should be the focus. i dont think banning guns is a solution but i do think we need to track gun sales to suspected terrorists better.
nevada
Senior Member
that's part of the problem I think. there are definitions for everything. when we pick and choose what those are, AND then change them as we see fit, is a problem.With all due respect, I will wait until I am not at work before I click on links specifically about firearms (although I am clearly cool with automotive forums :banana
I believe you directed the trailing questions at me? If not then its just my ego talking but I'll go ahead and answer anyway;
I made the point that my definition has nothing to do with the appearance of the firearm. Further, I can assure you that my distaste for the current state of "media" is pretty high, so I can safely say I do not take their word at face value. What makes a weapon one that is designed for assault rather than sport or hunting in my mind? Rounds per minute. It has nothing to do with whether the action is semi or full auto. Beyond a certain point, and no I am not about to try and define that number, the rounds per minute cross over from being merely a sporting or defensive weapon and go to being one designed for offense/assault. As I said, I have not followed the links you posted but I intend to, however I would be wiling to bet that the individual or organization who wrote the definition you stated have a vested interest in keeping the AR off of the banned "assault" weapons list. A more neutral party without "skin in the game" as it were, would be better able (with proper research) to provide an accurate definition.
But hey, that's my opinion.
you call it an assault rifle based on how many rounds it cant shoot in a minute, but you cannot(will not?) define HOW MANY rounds that actually is? wow.
does one semi-auto firearm shoot faster that another? every single one, still only shoots ONE round per trigger pull. pistols and rifles included.
here's a link to info regarding this particular firearm.
M&P15-22 .22 LR - Smith & Wesson
this rifle is, by NEITHER of the above definitions an assault rifle. though, simply by looks, I expect most people would bunch it in the same group as all the rest.
that's a problem.
how about this one? its also a semi-auto. but, it shoots a MUCH more powerful cartridge than most AR's. is this an assault rifle also?
if I had the time, I could do this all day. the point is, assault is an action. a firearm is a tool, it will not, and cannot operate by itself. PEOPLE are the issue, not guns. but the media, and our government has done a damn fine job spinning the blame away from people.
Bigshankhank
New member
Which is precisely why we need a single definition, established by an organization NOT associated with either side of the debate. Thus far, this definition does not exist.
Wow? I guess that it amazing? I've been civil thus far, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not being a snarky douchebag. And no, without research (which I've noticed is strangely difficult to find funding for) any reasonable person would be hesitant to set standards for what is and what isn't acceptable.
I trust you are educated/familiar enough with firearms to understand that rounds per minute means more than just how quickly one can pull a trigger, right? Because even with my knowledge (not limited but not extensive, either) of them I know that a big part of that is capacity per magazine and how rapidly one can reload said weapon with a new magazine. Hell I know guys that can manage a bolt action rifle pretty damn rapidly, yet the great equalizer is having to drop in new shells every five or ten rounds. Nevertheless, the effort and length of the trigger pull is a factor as well, affecting the rate at which a shooter can discharge rounds from a magazine. This is not about training someone to set a speed record, just what can be taken as the rate at which an average shooter can discharge in a minute.
I would argue that an average shooter, with a 20-30 round magazine, given the easy trigger action of an AR coupled with a simple reloading process from empty to fresh magazine, can fire a higher number of rounds in a minute than that same shooter with a rifle with a bolt action, longer trigger pull and smaller mag with a more difficult recharge process.
here's a link to info regarding this particular firearm.
M&P15-22 .22 LR - Smith & Wesson
this rifle is, by NEITHER of the above definitions an assault rifle. though, simply by looks, I expect most people would bunch it in the same group as all the rest.
that's a problem.
how about this one? its also a semi-auto. but, it shoots a MUCH more powerful cartridge than most AR's. is this an assault rifle also?
I don't believe caliber has that much to do with lethality at close range (which, lets be honest is the range at which most mass shootings take place) unless you go with something really small such as a .17SMR. Consider this most recent one was batting nearly .500 dead/injured (0.480 precisely), and that ratio could still go up for the ones in critical condition. A 7.62mm will certainly leave a larger hole, but the victim will end up just as dead.
And I appreciate you taking the time, I enjoy a good debate as well as anyone. I will agree that assault is primarily an action. I disagree that dismissing that word from the intent of the design of a device is proper. I also agree that people are the problem, yet I wouldn't hand a responsible person a weapon capable of committing a violent act on a large scale, much less an irresponsible one. You can draw a line at bombs as being acceptably illegal, perhaps its time for that line to shift is my point. Not arbitrarily by any means, but without even being able to research cause & effect regarding gun violence, all politicians are doing is trying to throw pasta on the wall and hope something sticks. Heck, if the research bears out the need for weapons such as the AR in society that would awesome because I enjoy firing them myself and would like the see the price come down if they weren't so controversial. Hmm, maybe there's something to that statement...:hiding:
Last edited:
simple
Senior Member
I feel like people are ramping up over words. The constant theme I'm seeing is disregarding people's opinions when they don't know precise verbiage. Which I can understand. But let's be real, how many mass shootings have occurred with weapons on full auto? Full auto is most effective when 1) you're having fun at a range wasting rounds and 2) on a bipod/tripod/mount of some sort. A weapon like an AR-15 based rifle is most effective when engaging targets on semi auto. 30rd magazines make these devastating weapons with considerable penetration beyond the initial target. People get so wrapped up in the full auto "assault rifle" discussion that they miss the forest for the trees.
MudPie
New member
ISIS attacks and Senate Democrats demand more gun control. The hypocrisy is phenomenal.
How about this...
Stop funding terrorist.
Stop arming terrorist.
Stop importing terrorist.
Stop coddling terrorist.
Stop justifying the actions of terrorist.
And stop ****ing with my second amendment rights.
Carry on.
How about this...
Stop funding terrorist.
Stop arming terrorist.
Stop importing terrorist.
Stop coddling terrorist.
Stop justifying the actions of terrorist.
And stop ****ing with my second amendment rights.
Carry on.
My 2 cents, I have no issue with law abiding citizens owning AR-15s.......here, in Canada they can be owned(mags are limited to 5 rounds) under strict rules and the RCMP does a background check on all firearm owners. Up to 7-8 years ago, they was even a long firearm registry which was stopped in most provinces with the exception of Quebec. They can & will take away your firearms under certain conditions as it is a privilege here versus a right.
I see this firearm control discussion no different than anti-smoking, etc. type lobbies......if you give them an inch, they will take a mile.
I see this firearm control discussion no different than anti-smoking, etc. type lobbies......if you give them an inch, they will take a mile.
MudPie
New member
In case you missed it...
Orlando Shooter Was Turned Away From Different Gun Store for Being 'Suspicious'
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/orlando-s...ore-being-141628142--abc-news-topstories.html
Orlando Shooter Was Turned Away From Different Gun Store for Being 'Suspicious'
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/orlando-s...ore-being-141628142--abc-news-topstories.html
nevada
Senior Member
so as to not continue this, I will leave the rest, but I must address this.
you yourself claim to call it something based on criteria that you DO NOT KNOW.
WOW indeed.
how can you dare to draw an opinion on something, but NOT have ANYTHING to base it on?
nevada
Senior Member
because words have meanings. there is a large contingent of people banking on the fact that many people are ignorant to the true meaning, and will use that to further their agenda. mostly in the case of banning firearms based on looks again.
such as the last AWB. that, had no discernible affect on gun crimes.
mostly, because its rare that those types of weapons are even used in such crimes.
This is specific to his attempts to purchase level 3 body armor.
-JD-
New member
And this is why nothing will change. Paranoia that making any type of concessions will lead to all out disarming of the population.
One fellow Canuck to another, I will take concession paranoia over giving up any rights/privileges anyday Sir!
