Well there you have it: Assault weapons ban

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
You guys can't carry KNIVES on the train. Ok? KNIVES. If I have a concealed carry permit I can bring my pistol with me on the public trains. MY GUN. Not some little sharp object, a full blown pistol, any pistol I like.
Guess which headline I remember the most when reading the Times this summer when I was in the UK? Something about "349 Knives confiscated from train riders". Clearly they can't catch them all-- later that week in another newspaper "8 Robberies on the Underground at Knife in the past week".

You know how many shootings we've had on our public trains since we enacted the concealed carry law? ZERO. Know what would keep the 16 year old kids from trying to rob people at knifepoint? People with concealed carry permits.

See the wiki article on gun laws for examples of how gun control [ban] laws have lead to _increases_ in gun-related violence the next year. In DC gun-crime shot up ~30%. In another case, it was something like 60%.

Those laws clearly don't work.

1. we have a LOT more intercity public transportation.
2. nah, no subway muggings in the US, not one, i do believe you... i really really do. No, wait, i don't.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

No, it's horrible because a person has to rely on his assault being filmed to get justice instead of being able to defend himself with a handgun.

But hey, it's your country. You do as you please and we will do as we please.

Dismissed.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: halik

Topic Title: Well there you have it: Assault weapons ban

:thumbsup:

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

No, it's horrible because a person has to rely on his assault being filmed to get justice instead of being able to defend himself with a handgun.

But hey, it's your country. You do as you please and we will do as we please.

Dismissed.

You know what, now you are just stalking me trying to get me riled up... Son, that's not going to work.

The day you can actually SAY "dismissed" to someone and it means they are dismissed would be a day when you have achieved something, that day is not this day and i doubt that day will ever come for you.

Cheerio.

 

[BuckNaked]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Well then, tell me with what weapon, what caliber and what you kept on doing afterwards.

Nuckfut accidentally with a .38spl to the bottom of my right leg from a few feet away. I drove 25 miles to the hospital. Never felt it until they were running gauze through it (clean through on both sides) like a piece of dental floss.

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: nullzero

Originally posted by: ayabe
What's cool about using assault rifles for home defense is that they're awesome in confined spaces with the added bonus of shooting your kids through the walls when your unloading your full auto at the perp with the dragonskin body armor who needs to steal your TV for crack.

.223 round has less penetrating power indoors then most handgun rounds. This round is used in the majority of AR-15s.

No it doesn't, it's a smaller round with a LOT more penetrating power than any handgun round that i know of.

.223 fragments instantly at ranges under 100m. It breaks apart in drywall quickly.

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

This is ridiculous.

Why then are so many police departments and entry teams using rifles then instead of submachine guns? It's not a capacity issue. Rifle cartridges are a completely different world of incapacitation compared to handgun rounds. Fragmentation at close rage also reduces the chances of over-penetration.

1. most handgun cartridges will do a lot less than a full metal jacket .223 going through regular drywall, i'm willing to bet you £1000 on this. My weapon of choice is a G3 but that doesn't mean i haven't fired many thousands of .223 rounds and many hundreds of 9mm rounds.

2. so you got an accidental shot by a moron, in the case of firing on a target you aim for center of mass and if you hit, it's not really going to matter if you got a Sig 226 or whatever, it will stop him. Get yourself some SPEER gold dot and that 9mm is way more than enough (it won't penetrate your target or any normally built dry wall either).

3. This makes no sense what so ever, are you talking about shotguns vs sub machine guns?
AFAIK, bolt rifles are only used in missions where accuracy is a need, both in police and in military and both in the US and the UK.

Actually larger mass lower velocity rounds such as 9MM rounds as fired from SMGs have fallen out of favor with most CT and LE agencies... partly because of the increased risk of over penetration. The more fragile lighter weight projectile at high velocity does have a decreased risk of over penetration, but does not eliminate it all together. You also get better instant incapacitation with the rifle round.

The M4 and other similar type rifles have largely replaced the MP-5 and other SMGs as was once widely used.

 

[nullzero]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
I still don't understand the need for assault rifles.

I think handguns are fine. Hunting rifles... okay. But what's the need for a semi/automatic rifle?

Many hunting rifles are semi-auto you moron. You don't even understand the topic you're talking about yet you support banning them. Get some facts asshole.

Excuse me?? Anger problems much?if you're that hot headed from a completely placid question I worry about you toting a firearm.

You're hurting your cause.

You are either purposefully trolling or really don't understand.

AUTOMATIC = pull and hold trigger and weapon fires as fast as it can. Like you see in the movies it goes POP-POP-POP-POP-POP-POP-POP as long as you hold the trigger. These weapons are incredibly expensive and almost never used in crime.

SEMI-AUTOMATIC = Most all guns. Most all guns. Did I mention that almost all guns are of this type? You have to pull trigger for each round fired.

Semi-automatic is my misunderstanding.

But why am I being called a moron and asshoel for posing an innocent question.

My statement is redefined.

Why would I need more than a semi-automatic handgun for self defense.

I'm not against the right to bear arms or even concealed weapons permits, but I just don't see the legitimate need for weapons like the AK-47 one of my friends purchased legally. As I understand it shoots 3 bullets in rapid succession per trigger press. Why would you need something like that for self defense?

Your totally clueless spouting out BS from the top of your head.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: halik
Ohh I get the arugment now - mexicans buy guns in the US (AKs in particular), drag them back down to mexico and do the sear mod for full-auto operation. I guess they do have a point there.

Or, perhaps as the drug cartels are buying cocaine from Colombian rebel groups they are also buying fully automatic weapons obtained from corrupt government troops or sympathetic governments from a certain country that starts with the letters Venez...

Though I suppose it is implausible that they would move guns as well as cocaine. That would be illegal, after all.

 

[BuckNaked]

Originally posted by: halik
Ohh I get the arugment now - mexicans buy guns in the US (AKs in particular), drag them back down to mexico and do the sear mod for full-auto operation. I guess they do have a point there.

If the Chinese government is willing to illegally import 2,000 fully automatic AK-47's into Long Beach, CA, to sell to gang members like they did in '96, I don't know why they wouldn't do the same in Mexico....

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash

Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: ericlp
yeah and lets hope your brother goes to jail for possession of illegal weapons when they pass the ban. Tell me again why you need cop killer bullets and assault rifles? Oh yeah probably because your a religious freak that belongs to a terrorist organization? Yeah...yeah... that's right...

You know why I do? Because I feel I do.

You know what? You don't need to eat anything other than water and carrots. Why? Because I say you don't.

You're cool with that, right?

Chuck

Why do you need armor piercing bullets? To pierce armor.

Why do I need to pierce armor? Because I'm not stable enough to own a gun.

For ****'s sake, can't you stick to a handgun?

Actually your logic is backwards.

Most gun crimes are committed by handguns. Even though they're legal, they don't carry the emotional impact of an "assault rifle", which could just be a normal rifle with a black stock.

The whole bit about "cop killer" bullets that can pierce bulletproof vests is another PR line. Just about any rifle bullet will easily pierce a bulletproof vest. In fact a rifle from the Civil War could probably shoot through one. It has nothing to do with special bullets, it's just the basic fact that rifles have so much more power than pistols.

If people would actually spend the time to learn about the issue they'd see that there is no defining line between a standard semiauto rifle and an "assault rifle". Most people would choose the gun with the black stock and the long magazine, but in actuality that gun could be the same exact model as the one with the nice wooden stock and the short magazine. It seems as if the look of the gun makes the emotional impact, and people want to legislate away the ones that look scary.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
I still don't understand the need for assault rifles.

I think handguns are fine. Hunting rifles... okay. But what's the need for a semi/automatic rifle?

The problem is that "assault rifle" is an emotional term, not a technical term. It's meant to have impact and manufacture consent for their purposes.

Another term that's often used is "sniper rifle". Why would anyone need to own a sniper rifle? Yet try to explain the difference between a sniper rifle and a deer hunting rifle. There is none.

I'm won't attempt to sway the opinion of those who are already educated on this issue, but sadly it seems that this isn't any different than most other issues in American politics in that it's really a war being waged between sides using 10 second sound bites, neither of which want to say anything informative.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
I still don't understand the need for assault rifles.

I think handguns are fine. Hunting rifles... okay. But what's the need for a semi/automatic rifle?

The problem is that "assault rifle" is an emotional term, not a technical term. It's meant to have impact and manufacture consent for their purposes.

Another term that's often used is "sniper rifle". Why would anyone need to own a sniper rifle? Yet try to explain the difference between a sniper rifle and a deer hunting rifle. There is none.

I'm won't attempt to sway the opinion of those who are already educated on this issue, but sadly it seems that this isn't any different than most other issues in American politics in that it's really a war being waged between sides using 10 second sound bites, neither of which want to say anything informative.

I disagree. Even this thread is chalked full of educated posters who have tried to go the extra mile and use more than "10 second sound bites" to explain the truth to the uneducated masses.

Every responsible gun owner and advocate I've ever known is more than willing to go that extra mile to use logic and the truth to explain their position... the same cannot be said for the fanatical peacenik uneducated gun-grabbers. It is they who refuse to pause long enough to bring facts and logic to the table. It is they who react on a purely emotional level without any knowledge of the actual subject whatsoever... It is they who are scared of the "evul scary black hunting --- errr, I mean "assault" -- rifles...

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: halik

Topic Title: Well there you have it: Assault weapons ban

:thumbsup:

Why do you hate the Constitution?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: halik

Topic Title: Well there you have it: Assault weapons ban

:thumbsup:

hypocrite

 

[Vic]

This should be as (in)effective as the drug war. And morally, no different whatsoever.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Posting from the safe confines of his cubicle by: BiitterBober

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

So all those reports of drive byes with Uzi's was just Left Wing Propaganda?

Full auto Uzi's cost ten of thousand dollars or more. They are not used by gang bangers. If they used an automatic then it was one that fell off a cargo ship, which a weapon ban will not stop.

You used to be smarter than this. Is it Massachusetts turning you into the worlds biggest pussy or just senility?

:roll: A flabby Nerd IT worker who dons leather chaps on the weekend and does his best impression of Tim Allen being a biker calling me a pussy?

If you were to pull that festering gob you call a head out of your ass and read my posts you'll see where I retracted supporting this ban.

Yeah, that's me. The flabby nerd biker wannabe who acts all tough from safes confines of my cubicle

:thumbsup:

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

No, it's horrible because a person has to rely on his assault being filmed to get justice instead of being able to defend himself with a handgun.

But hey, it's your country. You do as you please and we will do as we please.

Dismissed.

You know what, now you are just stalking me trying to get me riled up... Son, that's not going to work.

The day you can actually SAY "dismissed" to someone and it means they are dismissed would be a day when you have achieved something, that day is not this day and i doubt that day will ever come for you.

Cheerio.

Ramble on all you like, but this doesn't affect you. This isn't your country and as such your opinions on this are dismissed.... and so are you "Son".

 

[Schadenfroh]

Since people seem to dislike assault rifles, would assault shotguns be covered in such a ban?

Saiga-12 demonstration (this is a full-auto modified one, but nearly all are semi-auto)

 

[Atheus]

Question: why do you people think an aggressive attitude is going to make others think you should be allowed to carry/use weapons? In a sense you're right - some people arguing against you really don't know what they're talking about (though many clearly do) - but how is insulting and threatening them going to help? They're already clearly scared of you. It's like arguing for drug legalization while charging around on cocaine and randomly headbutting people.

@nobodyknows: JohnOfSheffield knows more about weapons than pretty much anyone here so I wouldn't 'dismiss' him if you want to learn something.

 

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

It is an abomination though, it's straight out of 1984, and it's everything that's wrong with this country. Still much rather live here than the states though.

 

[GeezerMan]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Since people seem to dislike assault rifles, would assault shotguns be covered in such a ban?

Saiga-12 demonstration (this is a full-auto modified one, but nearly all are semi-auto)

OK, it clearly shows, and he describes, a full auto shotgun. It is illegal to own a full auto firearm , including full auto shotguns, without the federal license. Any full auto sear made after May 19, 1986, can not be purchased by the public at all. The full auto sear makes a semi-auto firearm into a full auto firearm.

The proposed assault weapons ban does not apply to any full auto weapon since they are regulated by their own special laws.

 

[Rangoric]

Is it going to be the same law as the one that "bans" bayonet mounts.

Bayonet mounts... Really?

I hate feel good laws that don't do anything.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Atheus

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

It is an abomination though, it's straight out of 1984, and it's everything that's wrong with this country. Still much rather live here than the states though.

The feeling's mutual, it's too bad you can still post on US message boards.

 

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Atheus

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Triumph
Secure beneath the Watchful Eyes!

WTF is that! Please tell me it's out of some science fiction movie and not real life.

It's basically an announcement of cctv cams in the subways, something the US beat the UK to with approx 10 years.

But it's horrible because it's British, right?

It is an abomination though, it's straight out of 1984, and it's everything that's wrong with this country. Still much rather live here than the states though.

The feeling's mutual, it's too bad you can still post on US message boards.

Ah yes - suppression of freedom of speech. It'd be much easier for you if you existed in your own insular little bubble wouldn't it. Land of liberty indeed.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Fully automatic(REAL assault) weapon ownership is banned now unless you apply for a special license. What the Assualt Weapon Ban affects are weapons that LOOK dangerous.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Since people seem to dislike assault rifles, would assault shotguns be covered in such a ban?

Saiga-12 demonstration (this is a full-auto modified one, but nearly all are semi-auto)

Awesome!!! - I been meaning to get one of those for homeD and filling it with 1 Buck - that's 12-18 x 30 cal flying each shot!

Anyway - Under the last ban this would disqual 3 ways, mag capacity - more than 10, flash suppressor, and pistol grip.