• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Tell me something, why are semi-automatic weapons "evil"?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
SolMiester said:
Really?.....the fact the weapon is made to spread as many bullets of death as possible and you are wondering why they are called evil?...
Click to expand...
Not only are you factually incorrect, you're an idiot.

There are dozens (hundreds?) of deadlier weapons that aren't up for bans.

Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg
 
Phoenix86 said:
Not only are you factually incorrect, you're an idiot.

There are dozens (hundreds?) of deadlier weapons that aren't up for bans.

Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg
Click to expand...

Wow, do you normally insult people who disagree with you? We arent talking about other weapons, whether or not they kill more people you FW...we are talking about a semi-automatic weapon for which its sole purpose is to kill people...
 
SolMiester said:
Wow, do you normally insult people who disagree with you? We arent talking about other weapons, whether or not they kill more people you FW...we are talking about a semi-automatic weapon for which its sole purpose is to kill people...
Click to expand...

I guess all my semis are broken then?
 
Fritzo said:
Who is saying semi automatic weapons are evil? All the talk I've heard is about assault weapons (which are designed for the sole purpose of killing a lot of people in a short amount of time), and I agree that civilians don't need them.
Click to expand...

Really so my .22 is strictly designed to kill people and nothing else huh? O wait it's not modded so that's perfectly fine.. But god forbid I put a pistol grip or paint it black.

WoW that's some nice freaking logic you got there.

Even if that is the case and the sole reason for anybody to own a rifle was to kill people, so what. The 2nd amendment isn't about freaking hunting. It's about killing people, it's about when the people decide the government has gone to far they can (try) do something about it.
 
Brigandier said:
The design makes them inherently less accurate than a closed bolt firearm.
Click to expand...

He wasn't asking about closed bolt versus open bolt, and the AR, AK, SKS, XCR, etc., etc., are all closed bolt, anyways. Closed-bolt is better for machine guns, as far as I understand it.

Edit: Meant to say open-bolt is better for machine guns.
 
Last edited:
futuristicmonkey said:
He wasn't asking about closed bolt versus open bolt, and the AR, AK, SKS, XCR, etc., etc., are all closed bolt, anyways. Closed-bolt is better for machine guns, as far as I understand it.
Click to expand...

Cept for the MG42 and MG34 which are two of my fav machine guns of all time. Those were both Open bolt systems, the famed PPSH and MP40 were as well.
 
SolMiester said:
Wow, do you normally insult people who disagree with you? We arent talking about other weapons, whether or not they kill more people you FW...we are talking about a semi-automatic weapon for which its sole purpose is to kill people...
Click to expand...
Only when they display such willful ignorance. I'll pretend you have an open mind about this and break it down for you. I know you don't, but since we're pretending...

First, almost every guns sole purpose is to kill something, with the exclusion of competition target shooting. How does that apply to semi-automatic weapons exclusively? It doesn't. So basically you're making an argument for banning all weapons.

Second, "spread as many bullets of death as possible" applies to automatic weapons, not semi-automatic. So basically you're trying to drum fear. While we're on that...

Third, "bullets of death". Really? I think I'll just leave that one on the table. You could have thrown in a "someone think of the children" while you were at it.

Fourth, "wondering why they are called evil?...". Inanimate objects don't have a moral compass. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Finally, if the goal is to limit "evil" and you think that going after weapons is a viable route to that (hint: that's an extremely debatable subject in the first place), why wouldn't you limit the "most evil" weapons which kill the most people??? Oh, that's right, we disregarded logic a long time ago.

Ergo, you're an idiot.

QED
 
SolMiester said:
Really?.....the fact the weapon is made to spread as many bullets of death as possible and you are wondering why they are called evil?...
Click to expand...


I must be using all my guns the wrong way then, not for what they were designed for. Or, maybe they're designed to shoot bullets, and where you put those bullets is up to the user. That would potentially make the user the evil one, not the tool, right? All of my guns have only been used to paper targets, clay pigeons, and plink.

Oddly enough, the only death I have ever spread with a projectile was via 16 gauge bolt action slug gun during deer season when I was a teen. :colbert:
 
I think the "logic" behind seeing them as "evil" is that a full auto or semi-auto gun spends less time reloading per shot, which could be beneficial to a crazy guy trying to kill lots of people in a hurry. Or something like that.

Of course it's the crazy guy who's the real "evil".
 
Red Storm said:
I think the "logic" behind seeing them as "evil" is that a full auto or semi-auto gun spends less time reloading per shot, which could be beneficial to a crazy guy trying to kill lots of people in a hurry. Or something like that.

Of course it's the crazy guy who's the real "evil".
Click to expand...

It's because he can fire more shots per second than pipe bombs thrown into a crowded room per second...That's why.


-_-
 
Phoenix86 said:
Not only are you factually incorrect, you're an idiot.

There are dozens (hundreds?) of deadlier weapons that aren't up for bans.

Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg
Click to expand...

Statistics can be used any way you want. By your graphic, we should ban handguns, and even I'm not for that.

How many people have used handguns in mass murders (where more than 4 people were killed) as opposed to assault weapons?

My biggest problem is we're at the point right now where other countries are recommending their citizens do not go to the US because you could be murdered. That's something they say about Somalia, not the United States. It's embarrassing and destructive. The gun/violence culture in this country is out of control, but everyone is too afraid to try anything because of fear mongering from both sides of the aisle.
 
Last edited:
mammador said:
eh? The US military uses a standard issue automatic weapon. So automatic weapons are "less evil" than semi-automatic? lol..

And what is an assault rifle? er.. isn't ANY weapon by definition designed to hurt, kill and injure people? lolol..
Click to expand...

An assault rifle is a selective fire (selective between automatic, semi-automatic, and burst fire) rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. Assault rifles are the standard service rifles in most modern armies.

Assault weapon is the vague term lawmakers and the media use to describe black rifles because they are racist.
 
Last edited:
Fritzo said:
Statistics can be used any way you want. By your graphic, we should ban handguns, and even I'm not for that.

How many people have used handguns in mass murders (where more than 4 people were killed) as opposed to assault weapons?

My biggest problem is we're at the point right now where other countries are recommending their citizens do not go to the US because you could be murdered. That's something they say about Somalia, not the United States. It's embarrassing and destructive. The gun/violence culture in this country is out of control, but everyone is too afraid to try anything because of fear mongering from both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...

No such thing as an assault weapon..
http://www.modelguns.eu/images/mini14p.jpg
http://apocalypsecometh.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ar15.jpg

Those are both the same weapon in terms of function.. Detachable mag, semi auto, .223 caliber, ect ect..
1 would have been banned in the proposed deal, 1 would have not... 1 looks scary, and has been coined by lawmakers as evil, the other has not...
While newtown was tragic. "assault weapon" bans have done nothing in the past to prevent such events? Anybody remember columbine? They used guns that we legal under that assault weapons ban.
The issue with this country is people, not guns. Put measure in place to keep bad people from getting having guns, and drop the hammer on them when they break the law. There are too many guns in the country to try and legislate them out of the system. And quite frankly, i have some guns that would have been banned? You think i would let uncle same come and take them from my house?
 
Fritzo said:
Statistics can be used any way you want. By your graphic, we should ban handguns, and even I'm not for that.

How many people have used handguns in mass murders (where more than 4 people were killed) as opposed to assault weapons?

My biggest problem is we're at the point right now where other countries are recommending their citizens do not go to the US because you could be murdered. That's something they say about Somalia, not the United States. It's embarrassing and destructive. The gun/violence culture in this country is out of control, but everyone is too afraid to try anything because of fear mongering from both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...

Virginia Tech, and the Arizona Congresswoman shooting were both with handguns and Columbine was done with various weapons legal under the last assault weapons ban.

I don't care what people in some insignificant country think about our rights and freedoms.
 
Fritzo said:
Statistics can be used any way you want. By your graphic, we should ban handguns, and even I'm not for that.

How many people have used handguns in mass murders (where more than 4 people were killed) as opposed to assault weapons?

My biggest problem is we're at the point right now where other countries are recommending their citizens do not go to the US because you could be murdered. That's something they say about Somalia, not the United States. It's embarrassing and destructive. The gun/violence culture in this country is out of control, but everyone is too afraid to try anything because of fear mongering from both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some proof of this. 1st I heard of it and sounds like total BS. If it is true, it's probably a country that has a beef with the US, like Mexico, who blames us for their cartel issues.

there is no gun violence and culture in the US that is out of hand. more fear mongering from the media.
 
lozina said:
Especially if they are black, have pistol grip and a long looking magazine.
Click to expand...

My wifes rifle,

941964_10151461478022897_412102933_n.jpg


Hers and his before the pink stock was put on my wifes rifle,

544720_10200181140630084_1427950669_n.jpg



~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for the opening post, sensationalism sales.

The more you hype something up, the more people believe it.
 
Last edited:
Phoenix86 said:
Only when they display such willful ignorance. I'll pretend you have an open mind about this and break it down for you. I know you don't, but since we're pretending...

First, almost every guns sole purpose is to kill something, with the exclusion of competition target shooting. How does that apply to semi-automatic weapons exclusively? It doesn't. So basically you're making an argument for banning all weapons.

Second, "spread as many bullets of death as possible" applies to automatic weapons, not semi-automatic. So basically you're trying to drum fear. While we're on that...

Third, "bullets of death". Really? I think I'll just leave that one on the table. You could have thrown in a "someone think of the children" while you were at it.

Fourth, "wondering why they are called evil?...". Inanimate objects don't have a moral compass. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Finally, if the goal is to limit "evil" and you think that going after weapons is a viable route to that (hint: that's an extremely debatable subject in the first place), why wouldn't you limit the "most evil" weapons which kill the most people??? Oh, that's right, we disregarded logic a long time ago.

Ergo, you're an idiot.

QED
Click to expand...

In all fairness, there is a big difference between a MAK-90 and a Colt .45 Government Model. A MAK-90 can accept a 30 round clip (yeah, I said clip) but the Colt only holds 7 or 8 rounds depending on the magazine... er I mean clip. Both are semi-auto only (meaning you pull the trigger once and it fires one bullet). I can empty a 30 round clip in a matter of seconds even though it isn't full auto.

I personally don't see a whole lot of use for civilian ownership of so-called "assault rifles" but I'm not sure I want to ban them completely either. I can certainly understand why someone who has lost a loved one at the hands of a lunatic wielding one of these weapons might want to ban them though.

My .02
 
Fritzo said:
Statistics can be used any way you want. By your graphic, we should ban handguns, and even I'm not for that.

How many people have used handguns in mass murders (where more than 4 people were killed) as opposed to assault weapons?

My biggest problem is we're at the point right now where other countries are recommending their citizens do not go to the US because you could be murdered. That's something they say about Somalia, not the United States. It's embarrassing and destructive. The gun/violence culture in this country is out of control, but everyone is too afraid to try anything because of fear mongering from both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...
Sure, statistics can be manipulated. You can monkey around with graph ranges, imply cause-effect relationships where they don't exist, and a slew of other things. That doesn't mean you discount all statistics. Tell me why this graph is bad, because it's pretty fair from my point of view.

When you are trying to improve any situation you almost always go for the major contributors. 80/20 rule. That of course is assuming there is a cause effect relationship between gun ownership and crime/murder. Most gun crimes are committed with illegal guns. So why enforce additional restrictions on lawful gun owners? I would think the goal should be to reduce illegal/unregistered guns, not make MORE guns illegal. Passing a law doesn't reduce the guns from circulation.

Mass murders vs. high single murders... Help me understand why 30 people's lives who die at once are more valuable than 30 people dying to 30 individual murders? Now, if you can manage that, change the number to 30 vs 120 which is closer to the ratio of "other guns" vs hand guns.

I think you nailed the problem in your last statement. This is a cultural problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top