LincolnDuncan
Thread hijacker
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2015
- Posts
- 6,648
Oh look no proof or even attempted reasoning...just more shit talk because you.
BTW I'm liberal, I just don't jump behind every "sounds good!" idea proposed that infringes on our rights without thinking about what it actually means or how it's practical application will effect things.
So then you think the past and current standards for what constitutes an "assault weapon" are totally bunk then?
You don't consider any semi-automatic (the actual performance/functional determination) to be an "assault weapon" then?? Not even the AR-15??
What standard do you think should define "assault weapon" then?
Or are you just leaving that out in the "reasonable people" judging things based upon appearance/feelings nether?![]()
It is you and your buds who continue to reframe my and other’s arguments by insisting that we are only looking at the appearance of the weapon. Not true. As we have stated countless times, it’s not the appearance that concerns us but the ability to kill many people easily. My preference would be that any weapon that is not auto or semi auto should be classified as weapons of mass destruction.
If we had a real functioning federal government, experts from both sides would be able to come together to thoroughly examine the performance of each weapon and decide if it is too dangerous to be owned by civilians.
