Tell that to US Army then. *chuckles*The term "assault rifle" is a made-up propaganda term.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tell that to US Army then. *chuckles*The term "assault rifle" is a made-up propaganda term.
See here is where you are wrong yet again. Burst fire is FULL AUTO fire with a limited number of multiple rounds per single trigger pull. It is defined as burst to delineate it from unlimited full auto and limited rounds full auto.No I have not said anything on it. I have posted links which have definitions. That you can't read and understand the English language is not my problem.
The definition comes from the US Army, and there are weapons which meet the US Army definition of "Assault Rifle" that have select fire, but do not have full auto as an option only semi, and burst.
But you keep on arguing, its fucking comical...
Show me a US Army Field Manual for an "Assault Rifle."Tell that to US Army then. *chuckles*
BOOM! Mic drop and walk away!Show me a US Army Field Manual for an "Assault Rifle."
Most of the left is factually clueless about guns and gun terminology. They invent their own politically charged terms to scare the ignorant in society.BOOM! Mic drop and walk away!
A military issued rifle is used to assault people. It's not rocket surgery.Show me a US Army Field Manual for an "Assault Rifle."
Ask and ye shall receive.Show me a US Army Field Manual for an "Assault Rifle."
Most of the left is factually clueless about guns and gun terminology. They invent their own politically charged terms to scare the ignorant in society.
That isn't a US Army Field Manual covering US Army small arms, and besides the definition presented is not characteristic of the AR-15, or any other semi-automatic rifle in common use in the US. So the term "Assault Rifle" used by the media to describe AR-15s or other semi-automatic rifles in common use, is a made-up propaganda term. You dropped your mike on your shoe.Ask and ye shall receive.
https://i.imgur.com/HrEmwCq.pngThe definition from the document image:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190904213732if_/http://031d26d.namesecurehost.com/gunfax/fstcp67.jpg
Boom Mic Drop!
EXACTLY RIGHT! Then they get pissy when you use correct terminology and say you know what I meant. I usually say that's not the problem, but do YOU know what you meant?Most of the left is factually clueless about guns and gun terminology. They invent their own politically charged terms to scare the ignorant in society.
Exactly. Number of people killed and what they were killed by means nothing. Unless it involves guns, then it becomes everything.I haven't seen a post anywhere about George Alvarez that ran into 18 people and killed 8 migrants, some Venezuelans, waiting in front of migrant shelter. He was reported to be cursing them and calling them invaders. Apparently mass killings only count if you use a gun.
Part of the reason I support mass transit is because of all the people killed by cars. Anything that reduces the number of people driving saves lives.Biggest issue with the anti gun crowd is they treat guns in a very strange and unique way. In no other case do they blame the existence and access to the object or weapon used to kill people, nor do they care about other things that kill a lot more people. Cars kill a lot more people than guns? Not an issue. Crazy person stabs a dozen people at a public place? Knives aren't the problem. It's only when guns are involved that suddenly the tool used and number of lives lost becomes important.
You're not wrong.Part of the reason I support mass transit is because of all the people killed by cars. Anything that reduces the number of people driving saves lives.
Because their agenda is gun control/gun confiscation.Biggest issue with the anti gun crowd is they treat guns in a very strange and unique way. In no other case do they blame the existence and access to the object or weapon used to kill people, nor do they care about other things that kill a lot more people. Cars kill a lot more people than guns? Not an issue. Crazy person stabs a dozen people at a public place? Knives aren't the problem. It's only when guns are involved that suddenly the tool used and number of lives lost becomes important.
Certainly makes it a lot easier for armed governments to control a population. Germany's government certainly realized that back in the 1930' and 40's.Because their agenda is gun control/gun confiscation.![]()
As did the Soviet and Chinese governments.Certainly makes it a lot easier for armed governments to control a population. Germany's government certainly realized that back in the 1930' and 40's.
Gun violence must be extremely low in those examples then. Why doesn't the anti gun crowd point to such examples as proof strict gun control is a good thing?As did the Soviet and Chinese governments.
Because they don't want to let out of the bag their true affection for Communism.Gun violence must be extremely low in those examples then. Why doesn't the anti gun crowd point to such examples as proof strict gun control is a good thing?
that has no bearing on this. And yes all those listed above, can and have killed people.Ever seen 50 unsuspecting civilians killed in minutes by any of the items listed above?
Your agenda is to falsely claim election fraud while calling anyone left of Reagan a commiesocialistantifawokester.Because their agenda is gun control/gun confiscation.![]()
And how would you fund bus service into the rural areas?Part of the reason I support mass transit is because of all the people killed by cars. Anything that reduces the number of people driving saves lives.
Well, in your case if the hammer and sickle fits then accept it and wear it.Your agenda is to falsely claim election fraud while calling anyone left of Reagan a commiesocialistantifawokester.