Semiautomatic Rifles

[Noodlegawd]

In the wake of the Buffalo shooting, we're once again hearing calls to ban "military-style assault weapons," whatever that means. For some reason, most proponents of that measure cannot bring themselves to admit that they really just want to ban all semiautomatic rifles.

What say you?

 

[Goshin]

The vast majority of murders are committed with handguns. Also quite a few mass murders... the VA tech murderer killed over two dozen with only a pair of handguns using 10 round magazines.

Shotguns would work too.

The AWB of the 90s demonstrated no significant change in violent crime statistics.

 

[RF667799]

The vast majority of murders are committed with handguns. Also quite a few mass murders... the VA tech murderer killed over two dozen with only a pair of handguns using 10 round magazines.

Shotguns would work too.

The AWB of the 90s demonstrated no significant change in violent crime statistics.

If the manufacturers would quit referring to them as "mass murder machines" and claiming things like, "The best tool for the job of massacre", they might be used less often yet.

Oh wait...that isn't the manufacturers....

 

[ttwtt78640]

In the wake of the Buffalo shooting, we're once again hearing calls to ban "military-style assault weapons," whatever that means. For some reason, most proponents of that measure cannot bring themselves to admit that they really just want to ban all semiautomatic rifles.

What say you?

Blaming the tool for its abuse by criminals is moronic. Guns to not cause shootings any more then knives cause stabbings, flammable liquids cause arson or bats/clubs cause beatings.

Using the “X type of gun should be banned due to the frequency or severity of its criminal abuse” argument would be more appropriate (yet no more valid) for a handgun ban than a scary black rifle ban.

 

[Goshin]

Blaming the tool for its abuse by criminals is moronic. Guns to not cause shootings any more then knives cause stabbings or bats/clubs cause beatings.

Using the X type of gun should be banned due to the frequency or severity of its criminal abuse argument would be more appropriate (yet no more valid) for a handgun ban than a scary black rifle ban.

After Waukesha, nobody called for a ban on cars.

 

[Rexedgar]

Blaming the tool for its abuse by criminals is moronic. Guns to not cause shootings any more then knives cause stabbings, flammable liquids cause arson or bats/clubs cause beatings.

Using the “X type of gun should be banned due to the frequency or severity of its criminal abuse” argument would be more appropriate (yet no more valid) for a handgun ban than a scary black rifle ban.

For what task was a firearm designed?

 

[ttwtt78640]

After Waukesha, nobody called for a ban on cars.

True, not even little red SUVs.

 

[RF667799]

After Waukesha, nobody called for a ban on cars.

Are you kidding? Do you know how strongly invested Americans are in their personally owned vehicles? I suggest a simple background check for motor vehicle possession, and people rise up squawking like disturbed geese.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Blaming the tool for its abuse by criminals is moronic. Guns to not cause shootings any more then knives cause stabbings, flammable liquids cause arson or bats/clubs cause beatings.

Using the “X type of gun should be banned due to the frequency or severity of its criminal abuse” argument would be more appropriate (yet no more valid) for a handgun ban than a scary black rifle ban.

You cannot have a shooting without a firearm.

 

[Integrityrespec]

In the wake of the Buffalo shooting, we're once again hearing calls to ban "military-style assault weapons," whatever that means. For some reason, most proponents of that measure cannot bring themselves to admit that they really just want to ban all semiautomatic rifles.

What say you?

Wheres the post on the Chicago fast food shooting, I think 10 were wounded or dead? For some reason the left isn't raising hell about that one?

 

[ttwtt78640]

For what task was a firearm designed?

What specific two rights does the 2A protect? Obviously, (fire)arms are designed to be lethal weapons, but that was not something which was (accidentally?) overlooked when the 2A was deemed to be a basic individual right of the people.

The 2A is not a right to shoot, or even shoot at, anyone or to hunt game (as some often try to assert). Just as the right to own a knife or club is not a right to stab/slash or beat anyone with it.

 

[Rexedgar]

What specific two rights does the 2A protect? Obviously, (fire)arms are designed to be lethal weapons, but that was not something which was (accidentally?) overlooked when the 2A was deemed to be a basic individual right of the people.

The 2A is not a right to shoot, or even shoot at, anyone or to hunt game (as some often try to assert). Just as the right to own a knife or club is not a right to stab/slash or beat anyone with it.

Narrow question strikes a nerve?

 

[ttwtt78640]

You cannot have a shooting without a firearm.

Brilliant! Was that fact not known when the 2A was accepted as part of the Constitution?

BTW, you can keep (buy or possess) and bear (carry) a firearm without shooting anyone with it. Maybe you should read what the 2A actually says - paying special attention to the word ”and” in the phrase “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms…”.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Narrow question strikes a nerve?

Nope. Unlike you, I answered your question.

 

[TurtleDude]

In the wake of the Buffalo shooting, we're once again hearing calls to ban "military-style assault weapons," whatever that means. For some reason, most proponents of that measure cannot bring themselves to admit that they really just want to ban all semiautomatic rifles.

What say you?

I'd like to ban anonymous polls myself

 

[ttwtt78640]

I'd like to ban anonymous polls myself

Yep, it would be interesting to see who favors allowing states to “regulate” (aka abridge or deny) individual Constituional rights without due process of law.

 

[Crovax]

In the wake of the Buffalo shooting, we're once again hearing calls to ban "military-style assault weapons," whatever that means. For some reason, most proponents of that measure cannot bring themselves to admit that they really just want to ban all semiautomatic rifles.

What say you?

If they do that just wait until the see what someone can do with a lever action

 

[TurtleDude]

For what task was a firearm designed?

dozens-but all come back to shooting a bullet or shot

 

[reinaert]

Prohibition doesn't work.

 

[TurtleDude]

You cannot have a shooting without a firearm.

nor without a human. I can however shoot something with a slingshot, a bow, a speargun, or a flamethrower.

 

[ttwtt78640]

If they do that just wait until the see what someone can do with a lever action

Or a pistol or shotgun.

Maybe we should ban homicide.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

nor without a human. I can however shoot something with a slingshot, a bow, a speargun, or a flamethrower.

If someone managed to kill 20 people with a slingshot I would almost just be impressed at that point.

 

[RF667799]

Nope. Unlike you, I answered your question.

Well you left the gate open when you said, "Obviously, (fire)arms are designed to be lethal weapons..."

That really isn't true as a general statement. Virtually all firearms can be used as lethal weapons. Some are designed with that more in mind than others, but some are designed with that not in mind at all.

And accepting that false statement brings one perilously close to accepting, "The only purpose guns have is killing", which is a similar false statement, but one meant to support a narrative. That narrative being that all gun owners are just murderers-in-waiting.

 

[reinaert]

Well you left the gate open when you said, "Obviously, (fire)arms are designed to be lethal weapons..."

That really isn't true as a general statement. Virtually all firearms can be used as lethal weapons. Some are designed with that more in mind than others, but some are designed with that not in mind at all.

And accepting that false statement brings one perilously close to accepting, "The only purpose guns have is killing", which is a similar false statement, but one meant to support a narrative. That narrative being that all gun owners are just murderers-in-waiting.

A weapon is a weapon, not a toy. All firearms are weapons. All. I wish you guys would have the decency to admit this. Your other arguments wouldn't seem, or be, so cringingly suspect.

 

[reinaert]

Or a pistol or shotgun.

Maybe we should ban homicide.

Homicide isn't banned. It's punishable.