White House to Push Gun Control

[nick1985]

This isn't supposed to be a shitting grounds for who has more gun knowledge. I love guns, I just don't see the need to have a 100 round mag in my collection...

Again, $5 paypal if you can find me a crime committed with an M4 with 100 round drum mag. Hell, finding regular 30 round crimes is hard enough...

Prove to us that they are a menace.

 

[alkemyst]

Also with these special bullets the average guy isn't going to spend $2-3 a bullet at the low end.

To outfit a high capacity assault rifle, you are talking almost $100.

 

[nick1985]

Also with these special bullets the average guy isn't going to spend $2-3 a bullet at the low end.

To outfit a high capacity assault rifle, you are talking almost $100.

Again, a civilian M4 is NOT an assault rifle. Assault rifles are defined as full-auto or select-fire weapons. A semi-auto rifle is not an assault rifle.

Also, a quick search shows 200 rounds of frangible ammo for $100

http://www.cabelas.com/rifle-ammuni...-A98F-DF11-A0C8-002219318F67&mr:referralID=NA

More like .50 per round, and I bet I could find it even cheaper if I looked hard. Not that much more than regular FMJ ammo.


*edit*

There is also HP .223 ammo as well. Certainly would not penetrate like an FMJ round.

http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.a...Silver+Bear+.223+62grn+HP+20rd+Box&groupid=21

I could get 100 rounds of it for $20.

 

[alkemyst]

Again, a civilian M4 is NOT an assault rifle. Assault rifles are defined as full-auto or select-fire weapons. A semi-auto rifle is not an assault rifle.

Also, a quick search shows 200 rounds of frangible ammo for $100

http://www.cabelas.com/rifle-ammuni...-A98F-DF11-A0C8-002219318F67&mr:referralID=NA

More like .50 per round, and I bet I could find it even cheaper if I looked hard. Not that much more than regular FMJ ammo.

It's like your whole clip vs magazine debate. Almost anyone would consider the M4 an assault rifle. Doesn't matter the official definition.

As far as frangible ammo, from what I have heard if you aren't using Glaser then you are pretty open to a lawsuit for shooting someone with it. Even that link doesn't mention personal protection.

There is a lot in the argument on these types of ammo, same with the hollow point debate.

Comes down to legally you are out to only protect yourself, not kill. It's a slippery slope.

Personally I don't think people should be able to own any type of firearm in attached dwellings, yet many seem the most armed.

 

[HAL9000]

In reality there isn't much different on any media. People think the internet is make-believe until they are served papers on libel, harassment, etc.

Some mom around here got pissed she found naked pics on her son's computer of his girlfriend...dumbass decided to mass email and post them up on various websites.

She's now on the sexual offenders list for child porn and almost lost rights to her son.

Exactly, if you read back that was the exact point I was trying to make

 

[nick1985]

It's like your whole clip vs magazine debate. Almost anyone would consider the M4 an assault rifle. Doesn't matter the official definition.

I guess we disagree here, I think the official definition does matter. The media has done a great job of mislabeling rifles. Most people use the term incorrectly, it furthers their agenda.

"An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

As far as frangible ammo, from what I have heard if you aren't using Glaser then you are pretty open to a lawsuit for shooting someone with it. Even that link doesn't mention personal protection.

There is a lot in the argument on these types of ammo, same with the hollow point debate.

Comes down to legally you are out to only protect yourself, not kill. It's a slippery slope.

Personally I don't think people should be able to own any type of firearm in attached dwellings, yet many seem the most armed.

Personally I would not use a rifle indoors, I'm just arguing for the sake of it. I would use a shotgun or my handgun with HP ammo. I do disagree with your notion that anyone in an attached dwelling should be unarmed. I feel thats a Constitutional violation.

 

[alkemyst]

Exactly, if you read back that was the exact point I was trying to make

I thought you were calling for an update to the 1st amendment to cover it, but yeah a lot of people get themselves in major shit over thinking nothing is going to happen to them online.

 

[HAL9000]

I thought you were calling for an update to the 1st amendment to cover it, but yeah a lot of people get themselves in major shit over thinking nothing is going to happen to them online.

No not at all I was arguing that the 1st amendment covers all speech and while media has changed speech hasn't so there's no need, the other guy was arguing that speech has changed as much as gun tech has.

 

[alkemyst]

I guess we disagree here, I think the official definition does matter. The media has done a great job of mislabeling rifles. Most people use the term incorrectly, it furthers their agenda.

"An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle





Personally I would not use a rifle indoors, I'm just arguing for the sake of it. I would use a shotgun or my handgun with HP ammo. I do disagree with your notion that anyone in an attached dwelling should be unarmed. I feel thats a Constitutional violation.

You would feel it's a violation, much as you feel the difference of a clip/magazine matters to the average person.

I still call it an emergency brake and love when some nerd gives me a thesis statement on that.

 

[xj0hnx]

If you were only allowed 10 round clips instead of 12 rounds (as pictured) would you feel less safe? Don't you think 10-12 rounds is a good number for home defense? That's hardly a high cap mag.

I'm talking about the 30, 50, 100 round capacity mags. What do those do for you, and why should average citizens be allowed them?

No one has posted a good reason why citizens SHOULDN'T be allowed to have them. Because some crazy kills someone using high capacity mags isn't a reason that law-abiding citizens shouldn't own them any more than if that crazy drove a Ferrari into the crowd that citizens shouldn't be allowed to have sport cars. Remember the term "innocent until proven guilty"? You are effectively saying law-abiding citizens are guilty. We are not children that need to have our toys taken away because you don't like that one child is throwing blocks at another.

 

[nick1985]

You would feel it's a violation

I would, and I bet so would the Supreme Court.

 

[xj0hnx]

100 rounds is heavy, there is no changing the physics of that. Makes for an unwieldy rifle. extended clips in a pistol also make for something hard to carry and fire.

In a war type situation they are useful when you are trying to provide cover fire or take someone out behind a wall.

Actually my 75 round magazine balances out my AK nicely. It's an underfolder, so the added weight in the back brings the center of balance back towards the grip. In a "war type" situation they have things like M249's M240B, and older M60's for high concentration suppression fire. No one would want to carrying half their ammo load in one magazine on patrol, and it would make maneuverability cumbersome and the units are already loaded out with a large capacity gunner.

anything larger than those regular style magazines or double stacked are just ridiculously unreliable.

Depends on which firearm you're talking about, in a handgun yes, in a rifle not so much. The one I have is a Chinese mag and it's design allows 75 rounds to be stored ready to go with no tension on the spring so it can sit for years without fatigue, the Beta C's, and Russian version of mine, and most double/single stack mags will fatigue the spring over extended periods of time, causing possible failure to feed.

there only purpose is novelty, so why don't you want people to have novelty items? You are trying to tell me that I should be allowed to prevent you from owning things I don't want you owning simply because I don't see a reason to own them? THANK GOD no one lets me be dictator or this shit would be worse than Russia. Tractor for all, fuck your wasteful SUV. No more Apple, EeePCs for all, all that other shit is expensive and wasteful!

Besides the aforementioned, yes, it is a good thing we don't tell people that they can't have their excesses. No one needs a Hummer, Lamborghini, or a Bugatti, but who is anyone to tell soeone they can't have them because they don't need them?

I love guns, I just don't see the need to have a 100 round mag in my collection...

I do, see how that works?

 

[xj0hnx]

The real scare is those with high capacity weapons in attached dwellings. One looks at that as the owner is banking on missing a lot.

Why does a high capacity mag make the rounds more dangerous? No, and in the middle of the night, in the dark, you don't know how many people are where, I'd rather have more and not need them than, than need more them and not have them.

It's like your whole clip vs magazine debate. Almost anyone would consider the M4 an assault rifle. Doesn't matter the official definition.

Actually, the real definition is why the gun control crowd is irrelevant in the debate. When you are calling for bans on things you don't even understand you aren't doing anything constructive. Barrel shrouds, bayonet lugs, pistol grips, banning things because they look scary, but are functionally irrelevant is stupid, and ignorant. If you don't understand what you are debating than you are destined to fail from the start.

Personally I don't think people should be able to own any type of firearm in attached dwellings, yet many seem the most armed.

Personally I don't care what you think.

The fact is that most engagements in the home, the street, or even on the battlefield are within 50m, usually much, much closer. Most of the time these engagements take place with, in the civilian world, medium caliber handguns, shotguns, none of which are anywhere near what anti-gunners are trying to ban. The big threat isn't a high capacity magazine, you anti-gunners are being lead by your emotions by ignorant politicians looking for something blame other than the person that committed the crime. Banning evil features of firearms doesn't get rid of the evil in man's heart, and no matter how much you take away from law-abiding citizens, criminals are still going to commit crimes, take away guns they'll use knives, take away knives they'll use bats, or cars, or pipe bombs, chains with a lock at the end, their fist.

Public education is the best course of action (not just for this, but almost anything). Making people afraid of firearms doesn't make them any less deadly, banning features doesn't make them any less accessible, banning them outright doesn't make criminals any less likely to use them.

 

[irishScott]

If you were only allowed 10 round clips instead of 12 rounds (as pictured) would you feel less safe? Don't you think 10-12 rounds is a good number for home defense? That's hardly a high cap mag.

I'm talking about the 30, 50, 100 round capacity mags. What do those do for you, and why should average citizens be allowed them?

And since when do we have to present a need to justify a hobby? And FYI the current legislation being proposed would limit capacity to 10 rounds. That would effectively ban many popular handguns as part of the the appeal of many of them is the ammo capacity.

As for 30 round rifle mags, maybe I'm stuck in a Katrina like situation and a gang comes knocking at my door. In New Orleans a task force of 20 armed police officers got held off by armed gangbangers.

And moreover, why am I, who have not and will never commit a gun crime, being punished because of other people's fear? I could own a nuclear ICBM and no one would be in danger from it on my account. Not saying I should be allowed to own one, just stating that I fail to see why the innocent majority should be punished for the fear induced by an an extreme minority.

Banning assault weapons or any weapons will not take them out of the hands of criminals. This has been proven.

 

[Darwin333]

It's like your whole clip vs magazine debate.

There is no clip versus magazine "debate". There are simply people who wrongly call magazines clips. Every person in the country that is not familiar with computer hardware could start referring to RAM as hard drive and it wouldn't be a debate either. They would simply be wrong.

Almost anyone would consider the M4 an assault rifle. Doesn't matter the official definition.

Would you consider a 22LR rifle with a 10 round mag an "assault rifle"?

 

[alkemyst]

There is no clip versus magazine "debate". There are simply people who wrongly call magazines clips. Every person in the country that is not familiar with computer hardware could start referring to RAM as hard drive and it wouldn't be a debate either. They would simply be wrong.


Would you consider a 22LR rifle with a 10 round mag an "assault rifle"?

You can debate it all you want, the masses determine the view.

In my line of work I constantly hear PC components referred to as incorrectly. I'd be quick out of a job if I wanted to butt heads with everyone that did so.

Much like I still call my parking brake an emergency brake, I call pistol magazines clips. Just like most but the gun nerds do.

 

[HAL9000]

nm

 

[Nebor]

You can debate it all you want, the masses determine the view.

In my line of work I constantly hear PC components referred to as incorrectly. I'd be quick out of a job if I wanted to butt heads with everyone that did so.

Much like I still call my parking brake an emergency brake, I call pistol magazines clips. Just like most but the gun nerds do.

I actually don't think I've ever encountered someone that actually owned a handgun that called a magazine a "clip." Even those with passing interest are quickly corrected, and then use the correct terminology from then on.

But if you want to continue to defend being wrong, more power to you. Makes you look smrt.

 

[alkemyst]

I actually don't think I've ever encountered someone that actually owned a handgun that called a magazine a "clip." Even those with passing interest are quickly corrected, and then use the correct terminology from then on.

But if you want to continue to defend being wrong, more power to you. Makes you look smrt.

what the fuck are you arguing?

 

[irishScott]

You can debate it all you want, the masses determine the view.

In my line of work I constantly hear PC components referred to as incorrectly. I'd be quick out of a job if I wanted to butt heads with everyone that did so.

Much like I still call my parking brake an emergency brake, I call pistol magazines clips. Just like most but the gun nerds do.

Actually I've never heard it been called a "clip" by anyone who wasn't a gun noob. Therefore your comparison is invalid. But that's me. If you like that reputation go for it.

 

[alkemyst]

yeah guys whatever. You realize most gun owners don't join forums and talk about the shit. They buy a gun and go to the range once in a while.

It's like the guys that own exotic cars not knowing what anything is properly called as well.

But hey, it's the internet anything is possible.

 

[bfdd]

john I was talking on a handgun, why would we be talking about anything else? Has there been any recent shootings with fully automatic assault rifles and 100rnd magazines? No there was some idiot who shot some people up with a gimmicky gun because he was crazy.

 

[Darwin333]

You can debate it all you want, the masses determine the view.

In my line of work I constantly hear PC components referred to as incorrectly. I'd be quick out of a job if I wanted to butt heads with everyone that did so.

Much like I still call my parking brake an emergency brake, I call pistol magazines clips. Just like most but the gun nerds do.

And you are just as wrong, if you have no problem being wrong that is your right. If you knowingly choose to be wrong I don't see why you have a problem with people correcting you.

You didn't answer my question, in your opinion is a 22LR rifle with a 10 round magazine considered an assault rifle?

 

[alkemyst]

And you are just as wrong, if you have no problem being wrong that is your right. If you knowingly choose to be wrong I don't see why you have a problem with people correcting you.

You didn't answer my question, in your opinion is a 22LR rifle with a 10 round magazine considered an assault rifle?

No. I am not talking about what I think here, I am talking about what most people do. I don't think a typical 22LR would have many saying it's an assault rifle though.

You aren't getting my point which is typical to those that believe proper terminology saves the day.

 

[irishScott]

yeah guys whatever. You realize most gun owners don't join forums and talk about the shit. They buy a gun and go to the range once in a while.

It's like the guys that own exotic cars not knowing what anything is properly called as well.

But hey, it's the internet anything is possible.

And if those people called a steering wheel a joystick I'd have the same opinion. Whatever.