Why does anyone NEED an assault rifle?

[My I]

It's amazing to me, and everybody else I tell this to over here, that the US doesn't ban the commercial sale of armour piercing bullets. Literally the only reason an armour piercing bullet exists is to kill cops.

There's no legitimate excuse to own one; any target practice you want to try out can be achieved with the same bullets that aren't modified to puncture armour, bucks and rabbits don't wear kevlar vests, and even if you intend to shoot a bunch of people with them the vast majority of people aren't walking around wearing body armour. The only reason they are manufactured and sold in the first place is with the specific and sole intention of being used to kill cops! It's a weapon that is quite literally designed to kill a specific kind of person; the police themselves, and your country won't even ban that!

I beg to differ. Armor piercing bullets ARE illegal and in fact even the Chinese steel core ammo has been banned because it is thought to be armor piercing even though it is not, in reality. And intended to kill police? Hardly. What TRUE armor piercing ammo is actually produced is for military and law enforcement only. it is NOT sold in stores, brick and mortar, virtual or otherwise.

As for weapons themselves, every type of gun on the market today was at one time or another designed for war, or is based on a firearm that was. The 1898 Mauser was the ultimate rifle of its time and is STILL the basis for most modern bolt action rifles like the Remington 700, Winchester model 7 and Savage model 10. Most auto-loading pistols currently produced are based at least loosely on John M. Browning's 1911 or Hi-Power designs. Even going back to 1776 the smooth bore musket and later Brown Bess rifle were designed for a military advantage but were quickly acquired by hunters. Same with the Winchester and Spencer lever action rifles. And so on. The AR15, AK47, their variants and alternate designs are no different. The Browning BAR (Grandpa's hunting rifle) was based on John Browning's military rifle design.

By the same token, I bet Henry Ford would be astonished at where the automotive industry is today. A.G. Bell would shit his pants if he saw the latest i-Phone. And both automobile and phone take more lives today than guns.

Yet liberals say the constitution is a living document that protects their rights to something our founding fathers CLEARLY could not have foreseen. But that does not apply to firearms?

Hypocrites.

 

[My I]

THIS is the REAL NRA.

 

[Hypoxia]

THIS is the REAL NRA.

Whatever. Current NRA leaders and spox attack victims and survivors, making them the lowest of fecal scum.

 

[BotanyBoy]

So where should we start?

Can the semi-automatic category, the "overwhelming majority of modern guns" be divided further? Yes, according to lawmakers with their assault rifle definitions. No, according to gun nuts, who say that those definitions are only cosmetic.

Not gun nuts, but small arms experts and law enforcement professionals including the ATF.

Let's think about who knows more about guns.....

A bunch of anti-gun lawyers who have never even held a gun in their lives much less fired one and think their threat level is based on appearance. Because DUH...of course the scarier looking it is the more dangerous it is!!

Or the weapons experts?? Who can clearly demonstrate that a Semi-automatic 5.56mm rifle is a semi-automatic 5.56mm rifle and it's just as dangerous regardless of the grips or if it has a bayonet lug....

If you want to keep pretending this AR15
http://www.mynameisfoxtrot.com/storage/FRS15%20riflestock01.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1355373649453


Is somehow less dangerous than this AR15

https://s20352.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/GettyImages-158539059-1024x683.jpg

Then whatever you gotta tell yourself to feel better about those accessories ban buddy

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Hey, Dumb Ass, can you name one mass shooting where the shooter got their guns illegally??

Um. No. I don't think so. All legally purchased guns.

Ergo: the laws SUCK and need to be changed. If that impacts all the sweet little snowflakes who wouldn't harm a fly with their fucking assault weapons, too bad. You've had it way too easy.

You sound a little mentally unhinged to me. How do we know you're not going to go postal with one of your legally purchased killing machines?

22%? Through LEGAL gun dealers? I highly doubt that. Quickest way to lose your FFL and your business is to sell a gun without a NICS check.

Draw that line at the criminals and focus on THAT. NOT law abiding gun owners. I went through a background check for every single one of my firearms. Went through an even more stringent background check for my CCW permit. and have been through even MORE stringent background checks for my work. So have 8 million other Americans.

Criminals don't go through background checks they know they can't pass. They don't buy their guns from the local gun shop. They steal them or get them from illegal gun dealers.

80% of gun violence in America is drug or gang related, and most often both. Don't waste tax dollars persecuting me and my fellow NRA members who have NEVER committed a violent crime. Spend it on tracking down the people responsible for the crime.

Apparently, I cannot say this enough to get through:

Stop blaming inanimate objects and the innocent and prosecute the CRIMINALS.

 

[Hypoxia]

You sound a little mentally unhinged to me. How do we know you're not going to go postal with one of your legally purchased killing machines?

He'll pledge to take all his meds at the prescribed times. Will you accept the vow, or insist he be institutionalized?

USA used to hospitalize loonies. Now they're left for homeless encampments, private prisons, nervous neighborhoods, and the GB. Just more cost-cutting.

 

[My I]

Whatever. Current NRA leaders and spox attack victims and survivors, making them the lowest of fecal scum.

And why is that? The NRA and gun owners like me had absolutely NOTHING to do with the school shootings. NOTHING. But you blame us rather than admit the system that LIBERALS created is a failure. That kid killed 17 schoolmates. I don't see ANYONE blaming HIM. Why? The School has recorded dozens of violent outbursts from him and yet it was not reported. Why? The Sheriff had dozens of complaints, warnings and calls to the kids home because of his violent behavior and did NOTHING. Why? The FBI was warned explicitly that this kid was going to shoot up a school and did NOTHING. Why?

Don't try to pin another accusation on me or the NRA until you answer all those Whys.

 

[Hypoxia]

The denial, it is thick here.

 

[phrodeau]

He'll pledge to take all his meds at the prescribed times. Will you accept the vow, or insist he be institutionalized?

USA used to hospitalize loonies. Now they're left for homeless encampments, private prisons, nervous neighborhoods, and the GB. Just more cost-cutting.

And now they're allowed to keep weapons.

 

[phrodeau]

And why is that? The NRA and gun owners like me had absolutely NOTHING to do with the school shootings. NOTHING. But you blame us rather than admit the system that LIBERALS created is a failure. That kid killed 17 schoolmates. I don't see ANYONE blaming HIM. Why? The School has recorded dozens of violent outbursts from him and yet it was not reported. Why? The Sheriff had dozens of complaints, warnings and calls to the kids home because of his violent behavior and did NOTHING. Why? The FBI was warned explicitly that this kid was going to shoot up a school and did NOTHING. Why?

Don't try to pin another accusation on me or the NRA until you answer all those Whys.

Cruz is in jail awaiting trial. I think quite a few people are blaming him.

Cruz was required to go through mental health assessments, and passed to the satisfaction of the state of Florida and medical professionals. That is hardly NOTHING.

 

[My I]

Cruz is in jail awaiting trial. I think quite a few people are blaming him.

Cruz was required to go through mental health assessments, and passed to the satisfaction of the state of Florida and medical professionals. That is hardly NOTHING.

If he was passed, why was he prescribed anti-depressants?

BTW: If you are prescribed mind altering drugs you cannot legally purchase or possess a firearm.

And while "quite a few", including myself, are blaming him, the left wants to blame the gun and the NRA.

 

[phrodeau]

If he was passed, why was he prescribed anti-depressants?

BTW: If you are prescribed mind altering drugs you cannot legally purchase or possess a firearm.

And while "quite a few", including myself, are blaming him, the left wants to blame the gun and the NRA.

I think the First Amendment gives people the right to point out that a gun owner on a rampage can use an AR-15 to bag the most kills. And if you think the NRA has nothing to do with AR-15 sales in the US, you aren't paying attention.

 

[phrodeau]

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/YouTube-shooting-Shooter-visited-gun-range-12805400.php

Aghdam's shooting spree could have been a lot worse if she had used a more powerful weapon or a higher-capacity magazine. Good thing she was only legally able to get what she used.

“Power of weaponry, the number of bullets and the ability to shoot more rapidly are the things that make mass shootings more deadly,” said John Donohue, a professor at Stanford Law School who studies gun violence. “The fact that she only had a handgun and it was apparently restrained to the legal limit in California is all to the good.”

 

[My I]

I think the First Amendment gives people the right to point out that a gun owner on a rampage can use an AR-15 to bag the most kills. And if you think the NRA has nothing to do with AR-15 sales in the US, you aren't paying attention.

What the fuck do SALES have to do with mass murder? This whole "NRA only cares about selling more machine guns" is complete horseshit and you know it. But the Libs just LOVE bullshit when they can spread it around to fertilized their agenda.

There are more than 6.5 MILLION AR15s LEGALLY owned in the US. If the GUN was the cause of mass murder you would KNOW it by now.

The first Amendment may give you the right to point it out but it doesn't guarantee that it's true. And it is NOT true. Also doesn't say you won't look like a total fucking childish moron for saying it. Which you do.

But the constitution DOES say that you cannot convict someone for another person's actions. Yet that is what the left wants to do.

 

[My I]

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/YouTube-shooting-Shooter-visited-gun-range-12805400.php

Aghdam's shooting spree could have been a lot worse if she had used a more powerful weapon or a higher-capacity magazine. Good thing she was only legally able to get what she used.

And what if she wasn't a bat shit crazy radical Muslim with a beef against YouTube for shutting down her propaganda videos?

Punish the CRIMINAL. Not the innocent. And stop blaming inanimate objects. Just makes you look stupid.

 

[phrodeau]

And what if she wasn't a bat shit crazy radical Muslim with a beef against YouTube for shutting down her propaganda videos?

Punish the CRIMINAL. Not the innocent. And stop blaming inanimate objects. Just makes you look stupid.

I think the guns used in shootings are pretty damned animated.

 

[My I]

I think the guns used in shootings are pretty damned animated.

How did they get animated? Did they jump up on their own legs and pull their own triggers?

Blaming the gun for shootings is like blaming spoons for you being fat.

 

[phrodeau]

How did they get animated? Did they jump up on their own legs and pull their own triggers?

Blaming the gun for shootings is like blaming spoons for you being fat.

You can’t see any contrast between the Parkland shooting and the YouTube shooting, fifty plus bullets and fourteen bullets, thirty-four victims and three victims, all because of the weapons used?

 

[dan_c00000]

like blaming spoons

Spoons aren't for murdering. Guns, however, are.

You still haven't answered my question: how many dead kids is it going to take before you realize you're wrong?

 

[My I]

You can’t see any contrast between the Parkland shooting and the YouTube shooting, fifty plus bullets and fourteen bullets, thirty-four victims and three victims, all because of the weapons used?

The weapon used made little difference between the two. The Youtube shooter used a 9mm pistol that likely held at least 15 rounds. She fired 5 times, the last of which was taking her own life. The reason she didn't fire more was because she couldn't get in the door and the police were already on scene,

If you want a comparison between the two. NEITHER of them should have been able to fire ONE shot. Both were violent wack jobs that should have been locked away. But Liberal California thinks locking someone up for being mentally disturbed is a violation of their rights.

 

[Blue]

Punish the CRIMINAL. Not the innocent. And stop blaming inanimate objects. Just makes you look stupid.

It's like you can't wrap your head around the concept of 'prevention' or something.

We do punish the criminals, obviously, that's such a lazy trail of thought. Restricting innocent people's ability to acquire firearms to prevent a percentage of those 'innocents' going out and killing people en masse thanks to the free proliferation of guns is not punishing them.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It's like you can't wrap your head around the concept of 'prevention' or something.

We do punish the criminals, obviously, that's such a lazy trail of thought. Restricting innocent people's ability to acquire firearms to prevent a percentage of those 'innocents' going out and killing people en masse thanks to the free proliferation of guns is not punishing them.

Since when is having your rights/freedom restricted not punishment?

In my country and yours freedom restrictions are the primary mode of punishment.

From sending kids to "time out" to locking murderers up.

This is no different, just because you support the restrictions doesn't change what they are.

 

[My I]

It's like you can't wrap your head around the concept of 'prevention' or something.

We do punish the criminals, obviously, that's such a lazy trail of thought. Restricting innocent people's ability to acquire firearms to prevent a percentage of those 'innocents' going out and killing people en masse thanks to the free proliferation of guns is not punishing them.

So we need to ban cell phones too. Is that what you're saying?

Motor Vehicle Collisions caused by cell phone use kill on average 11 children EVERY SINGLE DAY. Where is your Public Outcry over that one?? Where are your demands for "common sense" laws? Where is your March for Life?

Motor Vehicle Collision in general caused over 40,000 deaths last year. Most common vehicle involved in crashes? BMW. Why aren't we banning BMWs? Where is your "visceral emotional response"? Where are your teenage crash survivors marching on Washington?

Where is your "common sense"? Stuffed up Hillary's fat ass. THAT's where.

 

[Hypoxia]

Spoons aren't for murdering.

I once crushed an innocent rodent with a soup ladle.

Guns, however, are.

Yeah, them too.

You still haven't answered my question: how many dead kids is it going to take before you realize you're wrong?

"Collateral damage" is the term of art. Dead kids and other corpses are merely the unavoidable byproduct of one's inalienable Lord-{JHWH}-given right to bear weapons of war in public. Victims exercise their right to kill or be killed by being killed. That's the natural, divinely-ordained order, hey?

 

[dan_c00000]

I once crushed an innocent rodent with a soup ladle.

I've used many a sneaker to squash many a bug and yet sneakers remained unbanned.