Chipman Can't Define An Assault Weapon

[Rucker61]

We were both right about the unconstitutional law being "capricious and arbitrary" but his definition of an Assault Weapon was seriously lacking. I wanted to be certain to include the actual farcical definition Democrats used when it was enacted into law.

Which definition? The one from 1994? The current bill from 2021, which differs from the 1994 law? The version in Maryland, which excludes heavy barrel AR-15s? The one that the Ohio Democrats introduced, which makes any semiautomatic firearm capable of accepting a magazine larger than 10 rounds an "assault weapon"? The one they tried to introduce in Florida that would make any semiautomatic shotgun an "assault weapon"?

That's the issue - they keep changing it, and if they have the power, they can define any firearm as an "assault weapon" in a new bill, or an amendment to a current law.

 

[Glitch]

So, effectively, a ban on "scary looking firearms". If we saw something that looks like it in a movie then we probably should ban it. Is that what you're getting at?

People like you would ban this -
View attachment 67335076

and are fine with this -
View attachment 67335077

It's just plain stupid.

Both look fine to me, but I would go with the fully synthetic version over that with the wood stock. Synthetics are able to take use damage better than wood. For 30 years my primary "camp gun" was a Mossberg Model 500. I took it everywhere with me during the Summer, particularly whenever I went salmon fishing. I was always leaving the firearm nearby on the river bank while I fished, and over the years the stock became scratched and pitted, and not a very pretty sight. I was also having other issues due to wear and tear, so I replaced it in 2018 with an AR-12. I went from this:


To this:


The AR-12 is also lighter, holds more ammunition, and is much easier to reload. Important factors for a defense firearm that you are always carrying. I have nothing against Mossberg. It was a very fine weapon and served its purpose well. I just happen to think the AR-12 is a better choice for the intended purpose of self-defense.

FYI, my Mossberg Model 500 would have been banned under the Assault Weapon Ban Act of 1994 because I had an extended tube magazine that could hold seven rounds. Plus one in the chamber gave it a total capacity of 8 shots. That is three fewer rounds than the AR-12.

 

[Rucker61]

The AR-12 is also lighter, holds more ammunition, and is much easier to reload. Important factors for a defense firearm that you are always carrying. I have nothing against Mossberg. It was a very fine weapon and served its purpose well. I just happen to think the AR-12 is a better choice for the intended purpose of self-defense.

How well does it feed? I know that in 3 Gun getting a box fed shotgun to feed well can be problematic.

FYI, my Mossberg Model 500 would have been banned under the Assault Weapon Ban Act of 1994 because I had an extended tube magazine that could hold seven rounds. Plus one in the chamber gave it a total capacity of 8 shots. That is three fewer rounds than the AR-12.

The AWB didn't apply to pump action firearms.

 

[Glitch]

Which definition? The one from 1994? The current bill from 2021, which differs from the 1994 law? The version in Maryland, which excludes heavy barrel AR-15s? The one that the Ohio Democrats introduced, which makes any semiautomatic firearm capable of accepting a magazine larger than 10 rounds an "assault weapon"? The one they tried to introduce in Florida that would make any semiautomatic shotgun an "assault weapon"?

That's the issue - they keep changing it, and if they have the power, they can define any firearm as an "assault weapon" in a new bill, or an amendment to a current law.

The 1994 definition of "Assault Weapon" was the only one actually enacted into law. The 2021 bill is effectively DOA and will proceed no further.

I don't give a damn about State definitions or their laws, since the 2010 McDonald decision by the Supreme Court made them all unconstitutional.

 

[Glitch]

How well does it feed? I know that in 3 Gun getting a box fed shotgun to feed well can be problematic.

I have only experienced a problem when using 3" shells. Maybe 1 in 10 will get jammed when being ejected. However, I have not experienced any jamming issues using 2-3/4" shells.

The AWB didn't apply to pump action firearms.

You are right, the law does specifically exclude pump-action firearms. My mistake.

 

[bongsaway]

Did you read anything I wrote? The definition of "assault weapon" is varied, arbitrary and capricious.



The military doesn't use AR-15s.


A law prohibiting taking your firearm out of your home would be worthless. Would the San Jose shooter have been stopped by such a law?



I've taken my guns out of my home hundreds of times. I've never shot a human, nor do I intend to.

I read every word. It seems to me the definition of an assault weapon is elusive at best. I didn't say anything about ar-15s. No the san jose shooter would not have been stopped so let's just do away with any and every firearm law on the books because after all if a gun owner decides to go postal, no amount of laws will stop the person so let's just throw them all away and have a free for all. As for the last part, not yet. Every time you walk out of your house with a firearm, the I do not intend to goes out the door with you.

 

[bongsaway]

need is a stupid position to base rights. does someone really need to say enter into a gay marriage? Hunting has nothing to do with the second amendment, and the MILLER case clearly directs that military suitable firearms are the ones most protected by the amendment. If CIVILIAN police officers are using a type of weapon in CIVILIAN environments, that means those CIVILIAN police officers' governing authority have determined that the weapons they are issued are SUITABLE for self defense in a CIVILIAN environment.

The bolded comment is so stupid that no one can really find your argument credible. How can someone take a firearm hunting, target shooting, if they cannot take it out of their home.

Blah, blah, blah, I love my guns. That's what I get from most everything you write on the subject.

 

[Lutherf]

I read every word. It seems to me the definition of an assault weapon is elusive at best. I didn't say anything about ar-15s. No the san jose shooter would not have been stopped so let's just do away with any and every firearm law on the books because after all if a gun owner decides to go postal, no amount of laws will stop the person so let's just throw them all away and have a free for all. As for the last part, not yet. Every time you walk out of your house with a firearm, the I do not intend to goes out the door with you.

Do you recognize a difference between offensive and defensive use of a firearm? If so, do you believe that defensive use of firearms should be restricted to military and law enforcement and then only when called to intervene?

 

[bongsaway]

Funny. I have never seen or been been issued an AR15 in the last 15 years of military service. Can you tell me who is being issued.
Can you explain to me then why I have taken my firearms out of my house literally thousands of times and yet they have never shot at a human or humans.
Sounds like you are full of shit.
But then what else is new

I'll try to simplify my responses in the future so you can get the gist.

 

[Roadvirus]

What a ridiculous person.

It's always amusing to watch a Pro-Gun Control politician try to define certain types of firearms.

 

[Rucker61]

I read every word. It seems to me the definition of an assault weapon is elusive at best.

The question is why do we have a definition at all?

 

[Rich2018]

Blah, blah, blah, I love my guns. That's what I get from most everything you write on the subject.

TD has basically said he wouldn't trade his guns to save all the lives lost/damaged in shootings...and that these lives amount to an "insignificant" total anyway

Furthermore, if guns were to be magically erased, things would actually be worse...as bigger buys could prey on the weaker guys.

 

[Rucker61]

TD has basically said he wouldn't trade his guns to save all the lives lost/damaged in shootings

So what? It's a purely fantasy scenario.

 

[Rich2018]

So what? It's a purely fantasy scenario.

The correct word is "hypothetical"


"involving or being based on a suggested idea or theory; being or involving a hypothesis : CONJECTURAL"

Definition of HYPOTHETICAL

involving or being based on a suggested idea or theory : being or involving a hypothesis : conjectural… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[OrphanSlug]

All things considered, whoever is being put up to head the ATF should be able to regurgitate the federal definitions for an assault weapons (rifles, what have you.)

 

[Rich2018]

All things considered, whoever is being put up to head the ATF should be able to regurgitate the federal definitions for an assault weapons (rifles, what have you.)

Why ?

There is no definition we can all accept.

 

[braindrain]

I'll try to simplify my responses in the future so you can get the gist.

There is nothing to simplify. You posted garbage and got called on it. Don’t like being called out on it don’t post garbage.

 

[bongsaway]

The question is why do we have a definition at all?

Good question. A hammer can be an assault weapon, a pen, a lamp, you name it.

TD has basically said he wouldn't trade his guns to save all the lives lost/damaged in shootings...and that these lives amount to an "insignificant" total anyway

Furthermore, if guns were to be magically erased, things would actually be worse...as bigger buys could prey on the weaker guys.

Why does that not surprise me?

 

[bongsaway]

There is nothing to simplify. You posted garbage and got called on it. Don’t like being called out on it don’t post garbage.

You and the other joe blow both said ar-15 which I never said. I can only presume there is a lack of communication somewhere?

 

[Rucker61]

The correct word is "hypothetical"


"involving or being based on a suggested idea or theory; being or involving a hypothesis : CONJECTURAL"

Definition of HYPOTHETICAL

involving or being based on a suggested idea or theory : being or involving a hypothesis : conjectural… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

When magic would be necessary, it's past hypothetical into fantasyland. For one man to give up his guns and save all lives would take magic, wouldn't it?

 

[Rucker61]

Why ?

There is no definition we can all accept.

There's the definition he would have to enforce, and if an AWB did happen, it would be that listed in the "‘Assault Weapons Ban of 2021", which is pretty much a retitled version of the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013", "Assault Weapons Ban of 2015", "Assault Weapons Ban of 2017", etc.

I'd especially expect the Senior Policy Advisor at one of the leading gun control advocacy groups to know the definition of "assault weapon", given that his bio there claims: "Expertise: Ghost Guns, Gun Industry, Law Enforcement, Assault Weapons"

David Chipman | Giffords

Courage to Fight Gun Violence

giffords.org

 

[Rich2018]

When magic would be necessary, it's past hypothetical into fantasyland. For one man to give up his guns and save all lives would take magic, wouldn't it?

So repealing the 2nd Amendment requires magic now ?

(and no it doesn't Btw)

There's the definition he would have to enforce, and if an AWB did happen, it would be that listed in the "‘Assault Weapons Ban of 2021", which is pretty much a retitled version of the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013", "Assault Weapons Ban of 2015", "Assault Weapons Ban of 2017", etc.

I'd especially expect the Senior Policy Advisor at one of the leading gun control advocacy groups to know the definition of "assault weapon", given that his bio there claims: "Expertise: Ghost Guns, Gun Industry, Law Enforcement, Assault Weapons"

David Chipman | Giffords

Courage to Fight Gun Violence

giffords.org

Still a very poor definition.

 

[Rucker61]

So repealing the 2nd Amendment requires magic now ?

(and no it doesn't Btw)

No, the magic would be that by TD giving up his guns, all lives are saved.

Of course, even if the 2nd were repealed, it would take magic to get all guns off the streets.

Still a very poor definition.

Well, there's all of them, and there's you.

 

[TurtleDude]

Blah, blah, blah, I love my guns. That's what I get from most everything you write on the subject.

No, we love freedom and we tire of people who don't have a clue what they are talking about telling us that our rights need to be sacrificed so the ignorant gun haters can pretend they are doing something.

 

[zsu2357]

Well, you can't

It's an impossible thing to define, indeed most types of firearms arm.

Why is that? You guys have been doing it for years, of course "assault weapon" is a made up term. But you guys are somehow convinced they are anything remotely military looking (evil?) or have a pistol grip, or a thingy that 'flips or goes up'?