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.
Originally posted by intrepid
Well, I've been using firearms for over 30 years and I've got to go with the left wing lunatics on this one. Assault rifles for hunting? After the first round is discharged, your aim is off, give me a break. I don't think hand guns should be used for hunting either, not as accurate as a rifle, more humane. Did that sound like lunacy Grady?
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
.In hunting, there are no one shot one kill scenarios. One should always have another round handy or another hunter to insure a clean kill. The Assault weapons ban does not address automatic weapons. In fact, all the weapons are semi-automatic.
[edit on 04/9/13 by GradyPhilpott]
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Well, first of all, the Assault Weapons Ban did not ban Assault Weapons. The Gun Control Act of 1934 did that.
Yes. It does sound like lunacy. Most "assault weapons" are in the calibers .223, 7.62mm/39mm, 9mm. There are many firearms in those calibers which fire semi-automatic. The first two are very useful for hunting small to medium game under some circumstances and all are good for self-defense.
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
Even the military does not have a real definition of an assault weapon. Most definitions are something on the order of a small to medium caliber short rifle, with the capacity for selective fire. There are no selective fire weapons that are covered by the assault weapons ban. All automatic weapons are covered under the Gun Control Act of 1934.
The Assault Weapons ban is bad legislation because it does absolutely nothing, except ban certain external, non-fire-function related features. It is stupid legislation foisted on the ill informed and fearful by liars.
[edit on 04/9/13 by GradyPhilpott]
noticed you added this after my reply to you. Well Grady, if you are that poor of a shot, I would not care to be in the bush with you. You don't take the shot unless it's going to take the animal down.
Hold it right there. We were talking about hunting, not your right wing propagandist lunacy. I'm sure that anyone reading this will be able to figure out which makes sense and which is tripe.
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Hold it right there. We were talking about hunting, not your right wing propagandist lunacy. I'm sure that anyone reading this will be able to figure out which makes sense and which is tripe.
Originally posted by DeusEx
Right! So, by neccesity, are all of vaguely associated with the left wing lunatics? Me, now I'm a centrist. I can go either way on some issues, but this particular subject seperates me from most liberals. We have tight gun control up here, which I do no approve of. It does not deter crime, and it even hinders the capacity for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. However, I do not see the neccesity for 'assault weapons' to be included. Sure, they CAN be used for home defence or hunting, but is it neccesarily a good idea? I haven't heard of anyone breaking into a house where an AR or SMG would be considered a more appropriate weapon for home defence over a 12 gauge. to put it simply, these are overkill weapons. I can understand possesing one if you are a member of the military or law enforcement, but beyond that I see little reason.
DE
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Those who know about firearms will recognize my posts as being truthful. Those who don't know about firearms will, like you, call me a lunatic.
It's not nice for moderators to bait members. There is a large and insurmountable power differential involved. We have names for behavior like this.
[edit on 04/9/13 by GradyPhilpott]
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
So you are against the type of round used rather then the function of the gun right? 12 gauge shotguns can be purchased in a semi-automatic versions. Some shotgun rounds can be more deadly then any so called "Assault weapon" rounds. Flechette,Exploder, steel AP,Rhodesian Jungle. rounds can be more deadly then long rifle rounds
Originally posted by DeusEx
Oh, I know exactly what the AWB got rid of- things which made killing slightly easier. None the less, I still do not support the possesion of assault rifles and submachineguns - even the semiautomatic variety - in the hands of citizenry. The concept of overkill remains the most obvious reason. Why would you need a semiauto SMG, anyways?
DE
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Rifles
Specifically, a rifle is considered an "assault weapon" if it can accept a detachable magazine, and possesses two or more of the following features:
Folding or telescopic stock
Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath the stock
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
Grenade launcher
Yeah these thing really effect the killing power of a Gun Since you seem not to know alot about the AWB you might look at Grenade launcher and say thats makes killing easier but you would be wrong. Grenades are tightly regulated as destructive devices and the AWB does not effect that at all.
But those things make a gun look scary to people that dont know anything about guns. So I can understand why you would be confused
Originally posted by DeusEx
So, what teh AWB was really getting at was tools of the trade- for hitmen and paramilitaries. Am I to assume you are overjoyed that these people can get their toys back legally? That you support them?
DE
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Do you really think the AWB effected if Hitmen could get silencers? Criminals still get there hands on such things if there is a AWB or not. They had there "toys" if this ban was inplace or not.
Not like the AWB even effects the purchase of silencers
Also it is not easy to get a 40mm grenade illegaly. Try to fiind one case in the US where a 40mm grenade was used in a crime
[edit on 13-9-2004 by ShadowXIX]
Originally posted by DeusEx
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Do you really think the AWB effected if Hitmen could get silencers? Criminals still get there hands on such things if there is a AWB or not. They had there "toys" if this ban was inplace or not.
Not like the AWB even effects the purchase of silencers
Also it is not easy to get a 40mm grenade illegaly. Try to fiind one case in the US where a 40mm grenade was used in a crime
[edit on 13-9-2004 by ShadowXIX]
No, they could sitll get silencers. But it made it harder for them to attach said silencers to things. Kinda hard without a threaded barrel....
And as to your 40mm grenade question, I don't suppose you've been through militia country, have you? No one's going to use it in a crime, except for possesion. But when they do, you'll hear about it. you're confusing the issue- the white-supremacist-uber-christian paramilitaries have the nades, and the criminals have the silencers.
DE
Originally posted by DeusEx
yeah, I know. .22 wheelgun for real hitmen, can't be silenced, etc.
Oh, and thsoe 40mm grenades are with your law abdiding citizens in that gigantic compound down teh street, the ones with gun emplacements surrounded by the ATF.
It should also be noted that I can make a fair sized bomb for 30$ or less, and boobytrap a house for 150$. Not hard to do anything destructive, and your potato silencer is both messy and heavy on the evidence. All I'm saying si that generally, peopl with lawful propensities don't need tools of the hitman's trade.
DE