LDS Teenager Murdered at her High School in Parkland

[Guest]

The second amendment doesn't preclude restrictions on types of weaponry people may personally own. There currectly are restrictions on what you choose to defend you family and home with. The second amendment does not allow people to keep and carry any weapon for any purpose.

Yeah I know. But if you're rich enough and have the right permits and licenses you can pretty much get whatever you want.

http://www.armslist.com/posts/4616205/o ... ive-cannon

[_Kevin Graham]

The thing I don't understand is why this thread is still in the terrestrial forum.

Some of you need to get your terms correct. This isn't a firearms forum so it's understandable.

Clip, magazine, who gives a damn what you call it? Unless you can show how semantics significantly changes the point being made, you're just derailing.

An AR 15, while it makes some of pee your pants, is not an assault rifle.

Ok, call it whatever the Screw you want. It is a highly efficient tool for slaughtering a large number of human beings in a short amount of time. Again, what difference does it make what it is called?

Statistically speaking, being a victim in a mass shooting of any kind is low and doesn't rise to the importance of my rights being given up.

So how many children do need to be needlessly slaughtered before your conscience on the matter is fazed? You don't have a right to own any kind of killing device your precious little heart desires.

As for gun control it's going to be hard to convince me to give up my right to keep and bear arms, including infrigments on scary black rifles.

You think they're scary looking? Is that why you own them? Because I think they're stupid looking.

Until the 2nd amendment is repealed (highly unlikey) none of you get to decide what I chose to defend my family and home with, and if I decide to use a scary black rifle because I can, too bad.

That's right. As long as there are walking meat sacks like you who care more about your collection of assault weapons than you do saving the lives of innocent children, there is always going to be funding for the NRA and morally bankrupt politicians. Screw you very much.

[_Kevin Graham]

Maybe Starbuck can mansplain the situation to these military vets

Iraq Vet: ‘I Know Assault Rifles. They Have No Place On America’s Streets’

I Used an Assault Rifle in the Army. I Don’t Think Civilians Should Own Them

FORMER U.S. SERVICEMAN CALLS FOR BAN ON SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPONS

"We are trained in the use of firearms, and many of us have served in combat. And we all think our country must do more to save lives from being cut short by gun violence. As this national crisis continues to rage, I ask my fellow veterans — patriots who have worn the uniform, who took an oath to protect our Constitution and the Second Amendment, who served this great country — to add your voice to this growing call for change. America needs you." -- Retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal

[_Res Ipsa]

The thing I don't understand is why this thread is still in the terrestrial forum.

Some of you need to get your terms correct. This isn't a firearms forum so it's understandable.

An assault rifle

It must be capable of selective fire.
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, such as the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62x39mm and the 5.56x45mm NATO.
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.
It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).

An AR 15, while it makes some of pee your pants, is not an assault rifle.

An assault weapon, (notice the difference here, it's important) is a term made up by the media and politicians to make scary black rifles seem more scarier.

Clip vs magazine:



Statistically speaking, being a victim in a mass shooting of any kind is low and doesn't rise to the importance of my rights being given up.

As for gun control it's going to be hard to convince me to give up my right to keep and bear arms, including infrigments on scary black rifles. Until the 2nd amendment is repealed (highly unlikey) none of you get to decide what I chose to defend my family and home with, and if I decide to use a scary black rifle because I can, too bad.

What Starbuck is saying is that the AR-15 doesn't meet the military's definition of an assault weapon because it doesn't have a fully automatic (or burst) fire mode. That's gunsplaining, as automatic weapons aren't legal in the US anyway. The original Assault Weapons Ban applied only to semi-automatic weapons. The fact that those weapons don't meet the Army's definition is a red herring.

ETA: Please gunsplain some more if I'm wrong, but the AR-15 meets every other part of the definition of assault weapon other than the capability for automatic fire.

[_Gadianton]

"...defend my family..."

I think it would be more accurate to say "collect in my basement". Every gun person I know drops the self-defense justification once in a while, but zero gun people I know would care about their guns for self-defense if the other hobby aspects, beginning with thrill of being a collector, were eliminated. And I haven't seen much to indicate their skills are updated and guns kept in such a way that they'd have an occasion to use their guns for self-defense. The real gun people I know have anywhere between 20 and 400 guns. The statistical chance that any of them will ever find themselves in the perfect scenario to defend themselves with a gun is very low.

Continuing with where I was going earlier, I have this friend who is a vocal right-wing Christian. A good guy and very entertaining for sure. He's right there to defend all the right-wing talking points daily as news comes in, and he made the point to someone the other day "why don't we ban all guns! And how about knives! and ..." and you get the idea. I know he has guns and has carried in the past although other than his party affiliation I don't think he's that into them now. It's interesting, because he's a guy who while very successful, had his rough days that included drinking and other things, and his Christian life has helped him get away from all that. Well, he's very much against substance abuse and drunk driving and the evils of alcohol and has told me straight up that if he were president, he'd re-instate prohibition because the costs are so high that none of the benefits are worth it, and he has no problem taking my occasional beer away.

I haven't asked him yet, but I plan to, how guns are any different. Why not just ban them all like he'd ban alcohol? Well, there's that one thing about guns: self-defense.

But here's where it gets interesting. He used to carry, and when I learned that I'd always ask him if he was packing heat when I saw him and he'd laugh and say no. One time, he explained that he no longer carries. The reason why, was because there were these suspicious guys out where we take our walks who would be at this particular spot all the time who appeared to be up to no good, possibly buying drugs or something and he got the vibe that they were dangerous. He had words with one of them once over something, and he was worried about future conflicts because if he shoots them, then he's worried about the legal consequences to himself. At what point do you really know when your clear to shoot? because he's got a lot of money and family to support and has something to lose in a lawsuit if not jail. That was his reasoning to me for not carrying anymore, and thus reducing the chances his guns would ever be useful in protection scenario to just about zero.

[_Starbuck]

The thing I don't understand is why this thread is still in the terrestrial forum.

Some of you need to get your terms correct. This isn't a firearms forum so it's understandable.

Clip, magazine, who gives a ____ what you call it? Unless you can show how semantics significantly changes the point being made, you're just derailing.

An AR 15, while it makes some of pee your pants, is not an assault rifle.

Ok, call it whatever the ____ you want. It is a highly efficient tool for slaughtering a large number of human beings in a short amount of time. Again, what difference does it make what it is called?

Statistically speaking, being a victim in a mass shooting of any kind is low and doesn't rise to the importance of my rights being given up.

So how many children do need to be needlessly slaughtered before your conscience on the matter is fazed? You don't have a right to own any kind of killing device your precious little heart desires.

As for gun control it's going to be hard to convince me to give up my right to keep and bear arms, including infrigments on scary black rifles.

You think they're scary looking? Is that why you own them? Because I think they're stupid looking.

Until the 2nd amendment is repealed (highly unlikey) none of you get to decide what I chose to defend my family and home with, and if I decide to use a scary black rifle because I can, too bad.

That's right. As long as there are walking meat sacks like you who care more about your collection of assault weapons than you do saving the lives of innocent children, there is always going to be funding for the NRA and morally bankrupt politicians. ____ you very much.

All life is sacred, all rights are sacred. I will not willing give up either.

Statistically speaking there are other ways in wich a significant numbers of innocent lives are taken (abortion). Are you as rabid about those lives?

[_Starbuck]

What Starbuck is saying is that the AR-15 doesn't meet the military's definition of an assault weapon because it doesn't have a fully automatic (or burst) fire mode. That's gunsplaining, as automatic weapons aren't legal in the US anyway. The original Assault Weapons Ban applied only to semi-automatic weapons. The fact that those weapons don't meet the Army's definition is a red herring.

ETA: Please gunsplain some more if I'm wrong, but the AR-15 meets every other part of the definition of assault weapon other than the capability for automatic fire.

A rifle is either an assault rifle or isn't. Assault weapon is a term created by the media and politicians to create fear. An AR15 is not an assault rifle, but according to the media is an assault weapon.

[_Jersey Girl]

Starbuck all this talk of what constitutes an assault weapon or not, and Second Amendment rights is fine. Please tell me what you see as possible solutions to the mass shootings we're seeing. What needs to be addressed and how.

[_Maksutov]

So don't call it an assault rifle. Call it a Poppazork. There, feel better? WTF problem do you think that solved? Any body come back from the dead? Jesus H. Christ. Gun geeks with their geek speak evading the everyday language of the horror they defend. This isn't about your goddamn technology. You don't get to define all of the terms or shut down the dissenting voices...unless you want to use your weapons to go around and start up your final solution of eliminating everyone who disagrees with your gd cultishness. And yeah, I've heard the ominous mutterings of crap like that from the extremists. So go ahead. Threaten me.

[_Starbuck]

So don't call it an assault rifle. Call it a Poppazork. There, feel better? WTF problem do you think that solved? Any body come back from the dead? Jesus H. Christ. Gun geeks with their geek speak evading the everyday language of the horror they defend. This isn't about your goddamn technology. You don't get to define all of the terms or shut down the dissenting voices...unless you want to use your weapons to go around and start up your final solution of eliminating everyone who disagrees with your gd cultishness. And yeah, I've heard the ominous mutterings of crap like that from the extremists. So go ahead. Threaten me.

Understanding terms is an integral part of coming to an understanding of how the issue needs to be addressed.