In which we discuss: Guns, Second Amendment, Weaponry, and Violence

[Cheddar's Cousin]

Just wanted to show how emotion plays such a large role in this debate.

According to the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the rifle type of assault weapon is defined as "a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following:

a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
a bayonet mount
a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
a grenade launcher

As you can see, any .22 can be modified with any of these and still not be any more dangerous than a .22.

[bmack86]

A .22 with a grenade launcher is no more dangerous than a regular .22? Explain that logic to me.

[SlowMotionApocalypse]

I just bought a gun. I mean I am all for completely outlawing them, but not before I get one.

[TomAz]

a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
a bayonet mount
a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
a grenade launcher

As you can see, any .22 can be modified with any of these and still not be any more dangerous than a .22.

Conclusion: when assault rifles are banned again, don't do any of the above modifications or you will be in violation.

Not so hard now is it?

Next?

[jackstraw94086]

i fully admit that not every motorcycle has all of these problems, but many have some if not all.

• loud as all fuck. sometimes with every movement (hells angels types) others when they decide to speed up really fast.
• driving in-between lanes just because they can, which generally includes speeding and makes it harder for them to be seen when other people are trying to change lanes in crowded traffic. also, this makes it difficult to anticipate where they are going, so the rest of us have to wait until princess motorcycle makes their move.
• those who travel in packs tend to go over the line in lanes.
• tailgating us and overall driving aggressively while expecting us to leave more space for them (especially in az where helmets are not required and rarely worn).
• quickly weaving in-between cars in different lanes where there is hardly any space (definitely not enough space for a car), which again, requires all of us to back the fuck up and give them a shitload of space until they cut someone else off.

i don't doubt fuel efficiency and motorcycles being a cheaper mode of transportation for some. but aggressive and loud motorcycle drivers appear to be the majority on the freeway.

so basically you have a problem with 1%'ers.
Just because motorcycles sometimes scare you doesn't mean they're being unsafe. You seem to project your insecurity about motorcycles on them.
You're neglecting to think about A) the majority of motorcycles that drive responsibly that you don't notice. B) the many more idiots on the road in full size cars causing more significant risk and discomfort to your driving experience.


when we're splitting lanes that means there's one less car sitting in traffic slowing you down.
It's also one more parking spot for you.

All of this at no cost to your comfort.

You're welcome.

[jackstraw94086]

Just wanted to show how emotion plays such a large role in this debate.

According to the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the rifle type of assault weapon is defined as "a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following:

a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
a bayonet mount
a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
a grenade launcher

As you can see, any .22 can be modified with any of these and still not be any more dangerous than a .22.

- This .22 rifle isn't exceptionally dangerous.
- This weapon that looks like an assault rifle is functionally no different than a .22
- other things that look like assault weapons aren't exceptionally dangerous.

Doesn't really work.

I don't see why we should be treating assault weapons (weapons designed primarily for military purposes) to be treated differently than other military equipment .

This is a ridiculous exaggeration (or is it?), but why are private citizens not allowed to legally have RPGs (I'm assuming)? What if I'm an RPG enthusiast? There's tremendous nuance to the RPG world and I pride myself on being an afficionado. It's a hobby, you see. My friend, he's a tank expert. I don't see why he can't run his tank around and fire rounds for target practice and entertainment, and potentially defense against tyranny (after all it'd be more effective than a rifle).

Why is the line so far north of military assault rifles?

Of course some rube will stomp his foot and say outlawing military weapons is an invitation to be dominated by the military, but I'll bet most of them that do have never actually been in the military.

[marooko]

so basically you have a problem with 1%'ers.

...

[mountmccabe]

There is no reason anyone needs a 10-round clip to shoot squirrels. If you are hunting with a 10-round clip you are a horrible shot and should find another hobby.

Just wanted to show how emotion plays such a large role in this debate.

According to the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the rifle type of assault weapon is defined as "a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and two or more of the following:

a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
a bayonet mount
a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
a grenade launcher

As you can see, any .22 can be modified with any of these and still not be any more dangerous than a .22.

All that means is that a better Federal Assault Weapons Ban should be written for 2013.

You're not going to ban handguns. It's not going to happen this generation.

[Cheddar's Cousin]

A .22 with a grenade launcher is no more dangerous than a regular .22? Explain that logic to me.

It's only more dangerous if you have a grenade to launch with it. Still, the .22 is no more dangerous. The grenade, on the other hand, is extremely dangerous with or without the rifle.

I'm not suggesting that hand guns be banned. Stiffer regulations on purchasing and transferring ownership are in order though. Also, illegal possession/concealed carrying should be dealt with more severely.

Currently in CA, the penalty for illegal possession of a fire arm is up to 6 months in jail and/or $1,000.00. not much of a deterrent if you ask me.

All that means is that a better Federal Assault Weapons Ban should be written for 2013.

Correct. And it should address these characteristics of true assault rifles specifically:
It must be a weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder
It must be capable of selective fire(capable of switching from semi auto to fully auto)
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge-more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
It should have a firing range of at least 300 meters

[bmack86]

It's only more dangerous if you have a grenade to launch with it. Still, the .22 is no more dangerous. The grenade, on the other hand, is extremely dangerous with or without the rifle.

It's attached. It's being used as part of the .22. You don't call a combination Taco Bell/Pizza Hut a Taco Bell. The reason those things are banned is because they enhance the weapon and create more danger. Yes, a grenade launcher is extremely dangerous regardless, but when it's attached to a weapon that is is more easily controlled and held, both the grenade launcher and the gun become more dangerous. They don't each exist in a void separate from the other.

A bayonet is dangerous on its own. It's more dangerous when attached to a rifle because it is more easily used and controlled.

A scope allows a rifle to be used much more precisely, effectively, and at a longer distance. I don't see how these are arguable points.

[bobert]

Correct. And it should address these characteristics of true assault rifles specifically:
It must be a weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder
It must be capable of selective fire(capable of switching from semi auto to fully auto)
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge-more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
It should have a firing range of at least 300 meters

Who the hell came up with this list? You're telling me a fully automatic Uzi or mac-10 without a stock would not be considered an assault weapon under this criteria because it can't be fired from the shoulder? I thought we were looking to improve the definition of assault weapon.

[chairmenmeow47]

so basically you have a problem with 1%'ers.
Just because motorcycles sometimes scare you doesn't mean they're being unsafe. You seem to project your insecurity about motorcycles on them.
You're neglecting to think about A) the majority of motorcycles that drive responsibly that you don't notice. B) the many more idiots on the road in full size cars causing more significant risk and discomfort to your driving experience.


when we're splitting lanes that means there's one less car sitting in traffic slowing you down.
It's also one more parking spot for you.

All of this at no cost to your comfort.

You're welcome.

thanks for letting me know what i find comfortable and what percentage of things i see, i was so lost without you.

don't want to turn this into the motorcycle thread.

[Cheddar's Cousin]

Who the hell came up with this list? You're telling me a fully automatic Uzi or mac-10 without a stock would not be considered an assault weapon under this criteria because it can't be fired from the shoulder? I thought we were looking to improve the definition of assault weapon.

Uzis and Mac-10s are not rifles, and therefore by definition can not be considered assault rifles. This is exactly the point I am trying to make. The discussion is constantly being cluttered and confused with bad information and emotional responses to that information.

Uzis and Mac-10s are submachine guns (capable of being fully automatic) and as such are already heavily regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Still, every time the discussion of assault rifles comes up, people want to know why anyone besides the police and military need Uzis or Mac-10s or whatever other machine gun or submachine gun. In my opinion, they don't, but that is a completely different argument.

True assault rifles, as the definition I posted above states, are Semi automatic. This is an important fact to remember when the image of an Uzi wielding psychopath is brought into the conversation.

[marooko]

Cheddar, kids died!

[VigoTheCarpathian]

My grandmother e-mialed this to my mother who forwarded it to me. It's called Texas Tanline.

[jackstraw94086]

thanks for letting me know what i find comfortable and what percentage of things i see, i was so lost without you.

don't want to turn this into the motorcycle thread.

A late thank you for taking the time to inform all motorcycle riders know that they're inconsiderate and rude.

I don't define what makes you uncomfortable, you just did it yourself.
And "1%ers" is note really percentage per se, it's a part of motorcycle language. You don't like 1%er clubs and types (google it), not "motorcycles". But the actual percentage is probably close, maybe it's higher in your local corner of the planet.
But yes, you observe far less about motorcycles than you think you do. Everybody does.

[jackstraw94086]

Uzis and Mac-10s are not rifles, and therefore by definition can not be considered assault rifles. This is exactly the point I am trying to make. The discussion is constantly being cluttered and confused with bad information and emotional responses to that information.

Uzis and Mac-10s are submachine guns (capable of being fully automatic) and as such are already heavily regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Still, every time the discussion of assault rifles comes up, people want to know why anyone besides the police and military need Uzis or Mac-10s or whatever other machine gun or submachine gun. In my opinion, they don't, but that is a completely different argument.

True assault rifles, as the definition I posted above states, are Semi automatic. This is an important fact to remember when the image of an Uzi wielding psychopath is brought into the conversation.

It is not a completely different argument. The discussion has always been about Assault WEAPONS. You chose to go down the rifle path.

[Cheddar's Cousin]

Assault rifles? I'm listening. All guns? Don't be a fucking pussy.

Always?

[marooko]

Always!

[Hannahrain]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a..._shooting.html

[greghead]

so basically you have a problem with 1%'ers.

This is dependent upon location, naturally, but the majority of the burly, fat-boy-riding bikers I see usually keep at a normal speed, use their hands to signal lane changes, and are generally safe drivers. They've likely been riding for decades and act like it. None of the riders speeding, tailgating, and zipping between lanes on 280 & 19th ave during rush hour seem to be 1%ers. Most appear to be well-moneyed Asian kids on crotch rockets.

There is a certain ego-mania amongst some riders. "I'm very important because I ride a bike, you all need to back the fuck off and oblige my choice of transportation. I can't possibly be at fault for anything road-related, it's all the fucking cars not paying attention to my awesome driving abilities." And it manifests itself in all the things Ivy said about tail-gating, expecting space, etc.


/threadjack

[chairmenmeow47]

http://www.startribune.com/nation/18...efer=y&refer=y

the president must feel crushed

Teen girl who performed at president's inaugural events fatally shot on Chicago's South Side.
Article by: Associated Press Updated: January 30, 2013 - 12:56 PM

CHICAGO - A 15-year-old majorette who performed at some of President Barack Obama's recent inauguration festivities has been shot to death in Chicago.

Police say Hadiya Pendleton was shot in the back Tuesday in a South Side park and died at a city hospital.

Authorities say Hadiya was one of about 12 teenagers sheltering from heavy rain under a canopy when a man jumped a fence, ran toward the group and opened fire. The man fled the scene in a vehicle. No arrests have been made.

Police do not believe Hadiya was the intended target of the shooting. A teenage boy was shot in the leg. Police did not release his name.

Hadiya belonged to the King College Prep High School band, which performed at several inaugural events in Washington, D.C.

[SlowMotionApocalypse]

AA culture

[Hannahrain]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a..._shooting.html

...

Bruce Haskin Sr

This graphic is very interesting, but I suspect very misleading at best, e.g. Adam Lanza is listed with the other dead from Newtown. I haven't the time to research these, but mu best guess that if you investigate these statistics you will find many of these deaths are from gang-bangers shooting each other, suicides, justified homicides. But the media prefers to mislead us into believing that somehow we could change the situation by enacting gun control legislation. The facts tell a different story. Violent crime, according to the FBI, has been decreasing since the 1990s even before the first "assault" weapons and after the sunset of this law [...] Maybe you are content to give up a little liberty to obtain some security, but reflect on what Ben Franklin said about you. I am not willing to give up some liberty to as some have said, to save one child. It's strange that we are trying to save one child, while we retain the "right to abort" over 54.5 million fetuses since Roe v Wade. But, this is necessary since we absolutely need to exercise our sexual freedom without significant consequences.

[chairmenmeow47]

i want to hear more about his "justified homicides". must be the case of bitches leaving the kitchen or something.

[Hannahrain]

Of the deaths in little Oregon listed here: Two have been suicides (one I am sorry to say of a policeman), two have been murders, one was firearm accident. One was by a sheriff of man who had just robbed the bank of a small town and who then when this robber walked down the street to the liquor store and where the sherif easily tracked him down, the perp did not surrender but raised his gun against the sherif who easily shot him with his already drawn and aimed weapon. The sherif stopped a perp and/or it was a sad officer assisted suicide? in all events rather sad stories and none were civilians defending their homes and families from perps with their personal armory in any way,

I speak idiot pretty fluently and am still reeling from this sentence, but the man who wrote the comment excerpted earlier "liked" this one. I wonder why we're not getting anywhere?

[xuclarockerx]

I think part of the problem is we're already in attack mode before we listen to what the other person has to say. Even if our suspicions are correct, it's sort of like a self-fulfulling prophecy.

[bmack86]

Hey people who argue that we need guns to protect ourselves from criminals: Look at the FBI's table on the amount of firearms used in justifiable homicides by year. Then consider the homicide rate for 2011. So then lets do the math. If 260 homicides in 2011 were justifiable, out of a total 14,548, then we're sitting at 1.7% of total homicides being justified. Think about your arguments and base them in fact, please. And then please don't use your gun to accidentally or heatedly shoot your significant other or child.

[TomAz]

Bryan what are the statistics on the number of times in the US in 2011 that guns were used to rebel against British tyrrany?

[mountmccabe]

There was that guy what shot his TV when he no longer got BBC America but that might not quite be what you're after.