It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First Good Example for an Assault Rifle Ban???

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: JoshuaCox

If he used assault rifle, he already got them illegally. There are a lot of semi-automatic hunting rifles (it's not always illegal to hunt with them).



Semi autos are illegal?? I have never heard of this...Matter of fact automatic rifles are LEGAL...

Just really hard to get and super expensive!!



That's not what I said at all.




Sorry if I misunderstood a lot to keep up with.....why would he have gotten the gun illegally?



Maybe it's an issue with definitions. I consider assault rifles as actual assault rifles, not the semi automatic guns we can buy at a shop.

Are people calling semi automatic rifles "assault rifles"? If so, no wonder it's such a confusing debate.


The main reason it's a confusing debate is because people with little to no knowledge on the subject like to show up and spout off memorized talking points. (not saying that's what you're doing).

In my experience, the more people get informed, the less anti-gun they become. There are exceptions of course.


So help me out. Is my definition correct or are semi automatic rifles considered assault rifles?



Anti gun people would say yes but technically you are correct....Only automatic military rifles are technically considered assault weapons...But people have extended that definition to include semi automatic sporting rifle and such.

Unless this was a fully automatic weapon then it wasn't technically an assault weapon!

as·sault ri·fle



noun

noun: assault rifle; plural noun: assault rifles




a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

edit on 2-10-2017 by GuidedKill because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: ausername
An assault weapons ban would have prevented this massacre in Vegas?

Yes or no question.


Hard to say, without knowing the details about the weapon used. If it was a fully automatic rifle, that considerably narrows the circumstances under which the weapon and his possession of it would be legal.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78
a reply to: Abysha

Your definition of 'assault rifles' as being fully automatic is actually the correct one. The popular definition of the term, pushed by the media and political hacks, however, includes certain semi-automatic rifles such as AR-15s in order conflate these with fully automatic weapons in order to further an anti-gun agenda.


Gotcha, thank you. So media definition is scary looking gun while real definition is full auto.

I think having a legal definition in place that the media has to stick to would help tons.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: intrepid

Does anyone even know WHAT weapon was used?
That may be important to the discussion?
Full Auto weapons are already illegal.


Before anyone jumps to conclusions, this has to be established, as well as the chain of custody of that weapon.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername

Except it's not a yes or no question.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: ausername
An assault weapons ban would have prevented this massacre in Vegas?

Yes or no question.


I would say no....

No matter what we do you can never stop crazy...



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Lots of people recognize that there's a problem with gun violence.

Lots of people just don't agree that taking guns away from them is going to stop gangsters in Chicago from shooting each other.

Sort of an important distinction to the overwhelming majority of legal gun owners that don't go around murdering people.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha
I think having a legal definition in place that the media has to stick to would help tons.


Agreed and I think this is where the US Supreme Court needs to stop kicking the can down the road and finally take up this issue once and for all and provide some guidance to Congress and the state legislatures as to what they can restrict and what they can't.
edit on 2-10-2017 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox
You can multiple the casualty rate by ten for the year, and rifles are still merely a fraction of firearm related deaths. In fact, you could multiply it by ten, and fists and feet are still more deadly every year!


It is a nice try, but your please will fall on deaf ears for the next seven years. But don't give up, we need reminders of the constant disgusting and misleading methods used to attack our second amendment.




posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: JoshuaCox

If he used assault rifle, he already got them illegally. There are a lot of semi-automatic hunting rifles (it's not always illegal to hunt with them).



Semi autos are illegal?? I have never heard of this...Matter of fact automatic rifles are LEGAL...

Just really hard to get and super expensive!!



That's not what I said at all.




Sorry if I misunderstood a lot to keep up with.....why would he have gotten the gun illegally?



Maybe it's an issue with definitions. I consider assault rifles as actual assault rifles, not the semi automatic guns we can buy at a shop.

Are people calling semi automatic rifles "assault rifles"? If so, no wonder it's such a confusing debate.


The main reason it's a confusing debate is because people with little to no knowledge on the subject like to show up and spout off memorized talking points. (not saying that's what you're doing).

In my experience, the more people get informed, the less anti-gun they become. There are exceptions of course.


So help me out. Is my definition correct or are semi automatic rifles considered assault rifles?



Many semi-auto rifles look like military issue assault rifles. The popular AR-15 variant is just a semi-auto rifle but it looks like a standard issue fully auto assault rifle. Anti-gun people tend to focus on how a gun looks, not how it functions. A gun looks scary, it is called an assault rifle even if it doesn't function any differently from a rifle.

It is like claiming a sports car sold to the public is the same thing as a real racing car. The may share some similarities and stickers, but that is about it.

The media has been complicit in confusing the public by allowing anti-gun activist to get away with falsely characterizing weapons to push their agenda.

While true automatic assault rifles are not "illegal" the average person can not get their hands on one through legal means. There are extreme vetting and licensing fees involved. So while not technically illegal, they are for all intents and purposes to the general public.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Wayfarer

Lots of people recognize that there's a problem with gun violence.

Lots of people just don't agree that taking guns away from them is going to stop gangsters in Chicago from shooting each other.

Sort of an important distinction to the overwhelming majority of legal gun owners that don't go around murdering people.


I don't disagree with you. However, its important to note the distinction that although plenty of people recognize there's a problem, the majority of people don't care or don't want to do anything about it. There is no sum total of deaths that they believe is worth restricting our right to gun ownership (and concurrently the ability to kill people wholesale from the comfort of your hotel balcony).



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: RazorV66
Obviously for someone to do something like this, they have a mental illness.
Why not try to expand the mental health industry to make it easier to get help?

Good start! Now would that be a fully public-funded health initiative, accessible to all without user fees?



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Maybe that's your takeaway from some of our resident nutjobs on ATS, but that's not really the reality of things.


Surveys by Johns Hopkins and the Pew Research Center show that about 85 percent of gun owners favor universal background checks, an idea fiercely opposed by the gun lobby. Gun owners also strongly support a federal database of gun sales, prohibiting ownership for those convicted of domestic violence and barring people with mental illness from buying guns.


WaPo

Even the rank and file of the NRA support some restrictions.

Yes, there are folks that oppose any and all restrictions on gun rights. But they're not the majority when it comes to gun owners.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Abysha
a reply to: JoshuaCox

If he used assault rifle, he already got them illegally. There are a lot of semi-automatic hunting rifles (it's not always illegal to hunt with them).



Semi autos are illegal?? I have never heard of this...Matter of fact automatic rifles are LEGAL...

Just really hard to get and super expensive!!



That's not what I said at all.




Sorry if I misunderstood a lot to keep up with.....why would he have gotten the gun illegally?



Maybe it's an issue with definitions. I consider assault rifles as actual assault rifles, not the semi automatic guns we can buy at a shop.

Are people calling semi automatic rifles "assault rifles"? If so, no wonder it's such a confusing debate.


The main reason it's a confusing debate is because people with little to no knowledge on the subject like to show up and spout off memorized talking points. (not saying that's what you're doing).

In my experience, the more people get informed, the less anti-gun they become. There are exceptions of course.


So help me out. Is my definition correct or are semi automatic rifles considered assault rifles?



Semi-autos are not assault rifles, no.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Oh hell no, I'm not giving my hard earned tax-dollars to some freeloading crazies! This is America god dammit! Let them pay their own way with their bootstraps or something.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey




No, they're not, they're just heavily regulated.

You are correct.
I was mistaken.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Wayfarer

Maybe that's your takeaway from some of our resident nutjobs on ATS, but that's not really the reality of things.


Surveys by Johns Hopkins and the Pew Research Center show that about 85 percent of gun owners favor universal background checks, an idea fiercely opposed by the gun lobby. Gun owners also strongly support a federal database of gun sales, prohibiting ownership for those convicted of domestic violence and barring people with mental illness from buying guns.


WaPo

Even the rank and file of the NRA support some restrictions.

Yes, there are folks that oppose any and all restrictions on gun rights. But they're not the majority when it comes to gun owners.


Many gun owners do support some restrictions. The problem is, when you give an inch they'll take a mile. Look at California.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: netwarrior
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Never let a crisis go to waste, huh? Despicable.


Please, tell us a better time to talk about gun restrictions other than after the worst mass shooting in US history.

This'll be good.....



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Maybe that's your takeaway from some of our resident nutjobs on ATS, but that's not really the reality of things.


Surveys by Johns Hopkins and the Pew Research Center show that about 85 percent of gun owners favor universal background checks, an idea fiercely opposed by the gun lobby. Gun owners also strongly support a federal database of gun sales, prohibiting ownership for those convicted of domestic violence and barring people with mental illness from buying guns.


WaPo

Even the rank and file of the NRA support some restrictions.

Yes, there are folks that oppose any and all restrictions on gun rights. But they're not the majority when it comes to gun owners.


I appreciate you taking the time to list all that, but it beleaguers the point that the 85% is entirely feckless when it comes to voting in politicians that would do something about it. Surely you must recognize a disconnect between an overwhelming majority supporting a cause, and the net result of the type of politicians we vote into power and their lack of action on this front.



posted on Oct, 2 2017 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Semi or fully don't need that on the streets, and no!! I'm not afraid of guns,haven't had ma quals renewed since I left the Navy and that's on me, but we need smart thinking about this instead of this anything goes crap which the NRA is promoting now, they used to be good at this, before being a mouth piece for small arm manufacturers.
edit on 2-10-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join