Biden wants to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines

[braindrain]

Until they do.

And yet the vast overwhelming majority never do.

I know that facts hurt your little rant but it is what it is.

 

[mrjurrs]

And yet the vast overwhelming majority never do.

I know that facts hurt your little rant but it is what it is.

Hurt me? You use assumptions and try gotcha's without ever saying anything.

Your defense's are amusing, nothing more.

 

[braindrain]

Hurt me? You use assumptions and try gotcha's without ever saying anything.

Your defense's are amusing, nothing more.

I made no assumptions. Only stated facts.
And it’s clear that those facts destroyed your little rant.

 

[mrjurrs]

I made no assumptions. Only stated facts.
And it’s clear that those facts destroyed your little rant.

Facts that fit your narrative, not what I said. How do you take this "There is a sufficient percentage of gun owners that are closer in actions to the 'idiot' than a safe gun owner" to the outcome that there would be millions of murders a year?

It's amusing.

 

[Chillfolks]

And how is that enforced? That would be up to the seller of the weapon, would it not?

Being tough to enforce and poorly constructed are different than not having the law. It was a feel good law so state politicians could say they did something

 

[zsu2357]

Manually, as in fingers place the next cartridge into the chamber. No magazine. No repeating mechanism such as in a bolt action repeating rifle or a slide action shotgun or a lever action rifle.

I wonder if he can put 2 and 2 together and not get 3?

 

[braindrain]

Facts that fit your narrative, not what I said. How do you take this "There is a sufficient percentage of gun owners that are closer in actions to the 'idiot' than a safe gun owner" to the outcome that there would be millions of murders a year?

It's amusing.

And what percentage of the approximately 81 million people who own guns ever harm someone with their gun.

Are you unsure what the word significant means.

 

[upsideguy]

View attachment 67453628

Idiotic..... any type of bad of a class of guns would come with a very specific definition, with looks not being a part of that definition. That is the way it works with most regulations. Experts would work to define what would constitute an "assault rifle." The fact that you can't define it in the comfort of your LazyBoy does not mean that it can not be done. This is an idiotic argument against regulating assault rifles.

 

[zsu2357]

Yeah, but they were better served than the obsolescent junk the US army and marines had to use on the Western front.

I wonder if you Englanders would have found them to be "obsolescent junk" when they were so afraid Germany was going to invade your quaint little island paradise and not have to beg us for weapons. Then collect them afterwards and destroy them.

 

[poppopfox]

Sorry but facts simply don’t support your claim. If you were correct we would have millions of murders and accidental shootings per year.
The overwhelming majority of gun owners are safe and harm no one.

The overwhelming majority of drug users are safe and harm no one.

The overwhelming majority of alcohol users are safe and harm no one.

Your argument is invalid.

 

[mrjurrs]

And what percentage of the approximately 81 million people who own guns ever harm someone with their gun.

Are you unsure what the word significant means.

And where do you get significant from?

 

[rahl]

Idiotic..... any type of bad of a class of guns would come with a very specific definition, with looks not being a part of that definition. That is the way it works with most regulations. Experts would work to define what would constitute an "assault rifle." The fact that you can't define it in the comfort of your LazyBoy does not mean that it can not be done. This is an idiotic argument against regulating assault rifles.

The constitution does not permit you to ban any class of firearm that is in common use. SCOTUS has already told you this.

 

[braindrain]

The overwhelming majority of drug users are safe and harm no one.

The overwhelming majority of alcohol users are safe and harm no one.

Your argument is invalid.

Struggling to follow along with the conversation huh.
I get it can be hard for some.

 

[braindrain]

And where do you get significant from?

Way to intentionally miss the point.

And we both know why.

 

[Willie Orwontee]

We're talking about assault weapons, not "other high capacity automatics." Whether a rifle is qualifies as an "assault weapon" typically has nothing to do with its capacity.

Which is proven because the "capacity" issue is always addressed in separate legislation directed specifically to the magazine.

Laws that ban "assault weapons" usually have as a criteria, the ability to accept a removeable magazine (of any size).

 

[Rich2018]

I wonder if you Englanders would have found them to be "obsolescent junk" when they were so afraid Germany was going to invade your quaint little island paradise and not have to beg us for weapons. Then collect them afterwards and destroy them.

Any port in a storm

Britain also took crap US tanks out of necessity and obsolete US Navy destroyers for the same reason

Didn't make them quality though.

 

[mrjurrs]

Way to intentionally miss the point.

And we both know why.

Intentionally missed the point? You mean the one I never made? Try again.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Of course. Would your violent death impact as many people or things as the President's?

Why should I, or anyone else, care? I have no less right to life than anyone else, Joseph P. Biden included.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Until they do.

Yes, everyone has not committed a crime until they do.

 

[mrjurrs]

Why should I, or anyone else, care? I have no less right to life than anyone else, Joseph P. Biden included.

Right? I concur.
Importance to others? Not even close.

 

[mrjurrs]

Yes, everyone has not committed a crime until they do.

And that is why the law-abiding gun owner argument is such bullshite.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Right? I concur.

Then you should agree that I should not be prohibited any means of defense that is permitted for someone else.

 

[Grizzly Adams]

And that is why the law-abiding gun owner argument is such bullshite.

Then everyone should be restricted as a future law-breaker, not just gun owners. Everyone needs an ignition interlock because every driver hasn't had a DUI... until they have. Everyone should be on the sex offender registry because no one's a child molester... until they are. Everyone needs to be on the no-fly list because no one's a terrorist... until they are.

Where does the logic break down for you, and why?

 

[RF667799]

Facts that fit your narrative, not what I said. How do you take this "There is a sufficient percentage of gun owners that are closer in actions to the 'idiot' than a safe gun owner" to the outcome that there would be millions of murders a year?

It's amusing.

Sufficient for what? To provide anti-gun radials with some anecdotes? Sure.

 

[CLAX1911]

Agreed, no such thing as "salt weapons."

just like there's no such thing as assault weapons.

Pretending? I spent a good 20+ years in a classroom helping children with developmental delays to live a semi-normal life. You?

Right to life trumps your right to play with dangerous big boy toys. Perhaps you don't share that maxim?

Possessing of the gun doesn't cost anyone in their lives if it did there'd be none of you left.