Actually, the weapons used there were not assault weapons. They were military "Styled", not actually military weapons.

Bill, Assault Rifles are full-auto.

And I don't think either a civilian UZI or a derringer have been used in a mass shooting.

I just want to shoot my guns in peace with my gay friend and then go to church on Sunday. Leave me alone. Can’t outlaw insanity.

This thread could have gone PARF and didn't. Good.
I got my butt kicked with my thoughts on gun ownership. Nobody liked my long thought out opinion.
What I read is that if you give the anti-gunners an inch, they will want another inch.
No gray area. Black or white.

I know the scare.

How may guitars should be limited to the musician? None. However... if someone gets your guitar collection unlawfully... they just play ****ty music and nobody gets hurt. Bad analogy.

AR15 means Assault Rifle 15. We have lots of them around here and ours are semi auto. You can convert them to full auto but you are in trouble.

I also doubt Uzi or derringer have been used in mass shootings and din't say so either. I was just answering the question What is a "Semiautomatic Assault Handgun" ?

Not so. "The fact the alleged perpetrator seemingly had at least one AR15 semi-automatic rifle, which police say had been modified - likely just by the insertion of a high-capacity ammunition magazine that held more than 7 rounds - was cause for concern."

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/111342456/why-do-members-of-the-public-even-need-militarystyle-semiautomatic-rifles

The AR is AR-15 means Armalite Rifle. Armalite was the original manufacturer of the rifle that was based on the AR-10 designed by Eugene Stoner.

This is an AR-7, not very “assault rifley”...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1554089350.jpg

Bzzt, wrong. Armalite Rifle.


And a "semiautomatic assault handgun" is a conglomeration of words created by a politician or "news" person intended to be used to install fear in the unknowing voter base/viewer.

No right. It's now a generic term for the rifle designed byArmalite, and made by lots of manufactures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite_AR-15

And yes, I didn't say it wasn't. I just answered the question. What is one? And the Uzi handgu n is a good example. What is with you guys :eek:

Meh.

I'm solidly pro 2nd, but I find the NRA tiresome.

Trump's team has banned bump stocks. I 100% support this.

"Assault rifle", or in the original German - "Sturmgewehr" - literally "storming rifle" - is a very specific type of weapon. Smaller than a standard infantry rifle, more of a carbine sized weapon, firing a markedly less powerful round than a full-sized, full-powered infantry rifle. Its key feature that sets it apart from a full sized infantry rifle is its selective fire capability. Originally, the selection was between semi-automatic fire and full automatic fire. After actual deployment, it was discovered that the latter was actually quite useless for most troops, and this capability was reduce from continuous full automatic fire to just three round bursts, necessitating a trigger pull for each of those three round bursts.

There is, unfortunately, much confusion regarding what constitutes an "assault rifle". There is a good deal of media-fed, politician-fed hysteria as well. For the sake of accuracy, let's try to keep our definitions straight. With that in mind, it's important to understand that there has never been a true assault rifle used by a civilian in a mass shooting. God forbid that ever happens - the carnage might be far worse than what we have seen so far.

I wish there were a way to keep guns out of the hands of bad guys. And crazy guys.

magazine- and purchase-limits don't fix that. I have a pistol with a 13-round capacity. I probably won't shoot anyone with it, but zombies....that's another story.

Maybe we should pass a law requiring everyone to have a good mom. I had one. Jeff did too, I think.

Yes. America need to have a rational discussion about this. That said, I totally agree with Jeff. Banning one kind of gun and not others is silly. Mafia hits are (or used to be) done with .22 pistols.

Good moms. That's what we need. And dads.

(flp the script)
There are many instances where a good person's life would have been saved if they had been armed at the time.
Laws prevented someone from defending themselves.

Anti-gun lawmakers and anti-selfdefence groups should be held directly responsible for their deaths.

this is the ultimate objective of the Democrat party regarding firearms

https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/m...m-magazine.jpg

Every gun law passed is one step closer to this objective and if you think "just a few more laws and they will be satisfied" then I have a certain bridge to sell you for a very good price. PM me for details :rolleyes:

The day after the Brady Bill was passed the LA TImes ran an Editorial Board oped...that said the Brady Bill did not go far enough, THAT ALL GUNS SHOULD BE CONSFICATED>

CA passed a assualt weapons ban where the grandfathered weapons had to be registered by a certain date. The state then had to extend the date for another year, presumably because no one was registering their weapons...CA in its infinite socialsit wisdom has created a whole new class of scoflaws...

There are 250M to 300M guns in the USA, with apx 75M plus gun owners..

During the 1992 LA riots the only businesses that were not burned and looted were those owned by Koreans who were on the rooftops with rifles..Everything else went up in smoke. Beverley Hills also did not suffer either as the police had orders to shoot to kill. If you watched that riot and the ones in the 1960's the salient point that you should be aware of if you are a sentient being is that civilization is but a thin veneer.

The Founding Fathers created the 2ND Admendment to insure against government tyranny. Most people in America have become complacent about their freedom and as such the government is slowly erroding it. A little law here a little common sense law there to move the flock along to subjucation and tyranny.

I haven't joined the NRA because of their position on high capacity mags. I've never understood the argument that by limiting the number of rounds a magazine can hold your right to keep and bear arms has been infringed. Makes no sense to me.

Sandy Hook.
Bushmaster XM15

#1 !! Very well said. That 'thin veneer' which the L.A. riots so tellingly revealed, shocked me profoundly!

For fifty years I've listened to the perennial plea, "If there could just be a rational discussion" -- as if those with an interest in this issue are irrevocably irrational. I don't think that is the case all. This is a subject on which there is no middle. To various degrees, individuals believe in the right to defend themselves in L.A. riot type situations while others believe that expunging that right would, on the whole, promote public safety.

I don't see a middle there and never have. Every potential and conceivable 'compromise' has been discussed, promoted, attempted; and will be again, next year. A 'rational' middle ground doesn't exist because it cannot exist. There is no data, formula, or test result on which to pin a 'rational' argument. This is a philosophical issue that has practical implications and pure logic can't resolve it.

Is the world a better place if magazines hold 10 cartridges or 11? Impossible to answer. Is society safer if I have 1 rifle in the closet or 6? Impossible to know. Safer if I buy a collector's collection or one firearm at a time? Impossible to estimate.

The founders considered this question to be one of political philosophy and wrote the 2nd amendment accordingly. Clearly, the authors of 'We hold these truths to be self-evident' were not afraid to operate on a philosophic level. Today, in a world swimming with data and numbers, I don't think we share the founders' confidence in that form of reasoning.

Robert