Poll: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

  1. #11781
    Scarab Lord Zoranon's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    4,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    The point is

    A: Mitch is up for re-election in 2014. 55 percent of people in his own state do not approve of his is job. It's quite transparent he will lose to a Dem in an upcoming election

    B: You don't need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all you need. Shooting more into an open area in my humble point of view is reckless.

    C: It shows the progressive action now starting to target those who are blocking common sense gun reform. Instead of hoping they will pass something. They are targeting people who are blocking it up

    D: Money does not equal how a measure will pass. If that was true. Romney outspent Obama yet still lost the election despite a large gap in money.

    I'm not sure why the money matters. But you asked so the purpose of bringing it up.
    Tell me are you a far seer? Because otherwise claiming year and half in advance that he will loose his seat is absolutely ridiculous.

    What the hell does this have to do with anything, as I already wrote, hunting is only a part of 2nd rights.

    The last time guns played a major role in elections, it cost the dems the house and even many dem representatives who were reckoned to win lost their seats, including the standing speaker of the house, why should 2014 be any different?
    Quote Originally Posted by b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  2. #11782
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoranon View Post
    Tell me are you a far seer? Because otherwise claiming year and half in advance that he will loose his seat is absolutely ridiculous.

    What the hell does this have to do with anything, as I already wrote, hunting is only a part of 2nd rights.

    The last time guns played a major role in elections, it cost the dems the house and even many dem representatives who were reckoned to win lost their seats, including the standing speaker of the house, why should 2014 be any different?
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.

  3. #11783
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.
    What you have been repeating is talking points with no actual relevance to the issue at hand. People spouted the exact same tripe after Columbine.

    The fact of the matter is this; gun control is only an issue at present because so much media attention is focused upon it. Another year or two and most people will forget about Sandy Hook.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  4. #11784
    Scarab Lord Zoranon's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    4,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.
    Stop sprouting the one bullet for hunting drivel you are not speaking at to your fellow anti-fun people here. I am going to repeat myself for the third time, if you fail to understand it again, as your post history suggest I will ignore you from there on: Hunting is only part of the second amendment rights, there is also self defence, where one bullet might not be enough, capiche?

    You are mistaking the mood around you for mood all around the country, if you look back at the 1994 awb, there were claims of final victory over pro-gun lobby, etc. After each school shooting there is a short term surge of popular support for gun control. But if you think sandy hook will still be relevant in 2014, you are deluding yourself.
    Quote Originally Posted by b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  5. #11785
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    What you have been repeating is talking points with no actual relevance to the issue at hand. People spouted the exact same tripe after Columbine.

    The fact of the matter is this; gun control is only an issue at present because so much media attention is focused upon it. Another year or two and most people will forget about Sandy Hook.
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.

    Well I deeply regret to disturb you on this issue. But This is not a losing battle. Country is dived and there has never been a time like now. When the guy blew away 10 peoples at the movies. That didn't change anything. When a kid killed 20 kids and 7 adults. Now that seriously woke something up and changed the attitude about these type of weapons.

    Again you are welcome to you're own point of view. However as Mitt Romney said to Obama in in the second debates. You're not entitled to make up you're own facts. An example of states including sandy hook already passing tighter gun control WITHOUT federal actions and the dozens of articles I've posted on the front page like on CNN article thousands marching on Washington for Gun Control is an example of my larger point.

    Sandy Hook changed Americas attitude to assault weapons.

    As for the poster above me. No need to lay threat to ignore me. It's quite obviously when you asked why I posted the video in the first place. You lost the entire point of my post. You ignored the Poll showing Mitch having a massive disadvantage in his own state. You rejected the one bullet at a time argument. No need to ignore me. I'll just kindly ignore you.

    Again I do not have a problem with a debate. At all. But when you honestly can see WHY I posted an AD. When I link an article, with a poll. It's not my responsibility to make sure you understand its quite obvious.
    Last edited by FusedMass; 2013-02-25 at 02:24 PM.

  6. #11786
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.
    "100 rounds a second", "30 round magazines". You keep repeating them as though they help your argument, when they have no relevance at all.

    The Supreme Court -could- hear a case a lot of things. Whether or not they find a case in your favor is up in the air.

    Well I deeply regret to disturb you on this issue. But This is not a losing battle. Country is dived and there has never been a time like now. When the guy blew away 10 peoples at the movies. That didn't change anything. When a kid killed 20 kids and 7 adults. Now that seriously woke something up and changed the attitude about these type of weapons.
    Tripe. This is the -exact- same mood people experienced in the wake of things like Columbine and Virginia Tech. It's a matter of cyclical event framing; gun control is the 'in thing' to talk about at present. Any reforms that come about as a result of this will be transitory at most, since the gun culture is socially and constitutionally firmly rooted in the United States.

    Again you are welcome to you're own point of view. However as Mitt Romney said to Obama in in the second debates. You're not entitled to make up you're own facts. An example of states including sandy hook already passing tighter gun control WITHOUT federal actions and the dozens of articles I've posted on the front page like on CNN article thousands marching on Washington for Gun Control is an example of my larger point.
    Malcontents, and idiots, the lot of them. What they are doing is passing token measures designed to mollify an angry mob, nothing more.

    Sandy Hook changed Americas attitude to assault weapons.
    Nope. It framed an issue, one that will cycle out just like Columbine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  7. #11787
    Scarab Lord Zoranon's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    4,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.

    Well I deeply regret to disturb you on this issue. But This is not a losing battle. Country is dived and there has never been a time like now. When the guy blew away 10 peoples at the movies. That didn't change anything. When a kid killed 20 kids and 7 adults. Now that seriously woke something up and changed the attitude about these type of weapons.

    Again you are welcome to you're own point of view. However as Mitt Romney said to Obama in in the second debates. You're not entitled to make up you're own facts. An example of states including sandy hook already passing tighter gun control WITHOUT federal actions and the dozens of articles I've posted on the front page like on CNN article thousands marching on Washington for Gun Control is an example of my larger point.

    Sandy Hook changed Americas attitude to assault weapons.

    As for the poster above me. No need to lay threat to ignore me. It's quite obviously when you asked why I posted the video in the first place. You lost the entire point of my post. You ignored the Poll showing Mitch having a massive disadvantage in his own state. You rejected the one bullet at a time argument. No need to ignore me. I'll just kindly ignore you.

    Again I do not have a problem with a debate. At all. But when you honestly can see WHY I posted an AD. When I link an article, with a poll. It's not my responsibility to make sure you understand its quite obvious.
    Yep, that is what I though, you are not posting here to debate, but to promote your own views. What you completely fail to understand is, that
    a) Polls taken year and half before elections are irrelevant
    b) Thousands marching? Hah? There were hundreds of thousands marching against abortions. Did abortions get outlawed?...
    c) Most important of all, gun control is a sure vote looser. Why? Well you and your fellow anti-gun activist will surely vote democrat candidates regardless of their stance on guns, or stay at home. But there is a lot of folks that vote dem, but are pro-gun.
    d) As I am sure you are well aware, gun laws as a whole have been loosening lately, many states have passed shall-issue concealed carry licensing schemes and of course there are the 2008 and 2010 Scotus decisions which have done more for the pro-gun side than a thousand marches could.
    Quote Originally Posted by b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  8. #11788
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    "100 rounds a second", "30 round magazines". You keep repeating them as though they help your argument, when they have no relevance at all.

    The Supreme Court -could- hear a case a lot of things. Whether or not they find a case in your favor is up in the air.



    Tripe. This is the -exact- same mood people experienced in the wake of things like Columbine and Virginia Tech. It's a matter of cyclical event framing; gun control is the 'in thing' to talk about at present. Any reforms that come about as a result of this will be transitory at most, since the gun culture is socially and constitutionally firmly rooted in the United States.



    Malcontents, and idiots, the lot of them. What they are doing is passing token measures designed to mollify an angry mob, nothing more.



    Nope. It framed an issue, one that will cycle out just like Columbine.
    I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. I kindly pointed out and posted articles (dozens of them) even BEFORE congress was sworn in. While this whole Gun Control was just a faint rumor. I paid attention to it because I can see in some situations the outcome is predictable. Since then there has been a massive debate about Gun Control not only here not in congress and numerous articles that I posted are a reflection of that.

    If you do not agree with me that's fine. That's alight. You have you're point of view, and I mine. However I at least accept the reality that is Obama were to pass a law. The Republicans would protest against assault weapons ban and it would go to the highest court in the law to decide the case federally instead of state by state.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree and see what happens but this is not going to magically go away.

    To poster above me. You already laid threat to ignore me. I kindly followed you're advice. Therefore you lose the right to have me respond to your statements when you say that.

  9. #11789
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. I kindly pointed out and posted articles (dozens of them) even BEFORE congress was sworn in. While this whole Gun Control was just a faint rumor. I paid attention to it because I can see in some situations the outcome is predictable. Since then there has been a massive debate about Gun Control not only here not in congress and numerous articles that I posted are a reflection of that.

    If you do not agree with me that's fine. That's alight. You have you're point of view, and I mine. However I at least accept the reality that is Obama were to pass a law. The Republicans would protest against assault weapons ban and it would go to the highest court in the law to decide the case federally instead of state by state.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree and see what happens but this is not going to magically go away.
    I don't agree to that. Millions of articles are printed every month, of course you're going to find a few about a particular issue. But the fact of the matter is that media attention has framed political focus to gun control, and it will cycle out eventually.

    Implying that such a law would get past the House. And trust me, it will go away. Give it a year or so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  10. #11790
    Scarab Lord Zoranon's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    4,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. I kindly pointed out and posted articles (dozens of them) even BEFORE congress was sworn in. While this whole Gun Control was just a faint rumor. I paid attention to it because I can see in some situations the outcome is predictable. Since then there has been a massive debate about Gun Control not only here not in congress and numerous articles that I posted are a reflection of that.

    If you do not agree with me that's fine. That's alight. You have you're point of view, and I mine. However I at least accept the reality that is Obama were to pass a law. The Republicans would protest against assault weapons ban and it would go to the highest court in the law to decide the case federally instead of state by state.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree and see what happens but this is not going to magically go away.

    To poster above me. You already laid threat to ignore me. I kindly followed you're advice. Therefore you lose the right to have me respond to your statements when you say that.
    I just wish you would stop labouring under the delusion that having you respond to my posts is some kind of a right, I post to correct you false statements and I have no desire to have you giving me the same untrue answer 3 times in a row.
    Quote Originally Posted by b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  11. #11791
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    I don't agree to that. Millions of articles are printed every month, of course you're going to find a few about a particular issue. But the fact of the matter is that media attention has framed political focus to gun control, and it will cycle out eventually.

    Implying that such a law would get past the House. And trust me, it will go away. Give it a year or so.
    I could have kept it to ten articles on the front page. I only keep the articles down to five. I re-recycle them out every week in favor of newer ones instead of clogging up the front page with every article on it. The overwhelming attention to it and numerous articles is more then a few. Again we have to agree to disagree. It's obvious we come on different sides of the issues. I have to start getting ready however. I just shared to share a NEW article.

    Notice I do not splash the victims of gun violence on the front page. Only the laws relating to the discussion of them. If I was extremely biased. I'd update every time there was a mass shooting with a little article. I try at least to keep things balanced.

    As for poster above me. It's not factually incorrect statements. I posted a POLL. How many times must I repeat that. I also follow the news extremely close on most of major news networks. I know what the chances of his re-election through several sources and I combine all the information to make my own point of view.

    Again you ignored me poster above me, so thankfully I do not have to continue to entertain you're misguided point of view of me posting false statements..
    Last edited by FusedMass; 2013-02-25 at 02:42 PM.

  12. #11792
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I could have kept it to ten articles on the front page. I only keep the articles down to five. I re-recycle them out every week in favor of newer ones instead of clogging up the front page with every article on it. The overwhelming attention to it and numerous articles is more then a few. Again we have to agree to disagree. It's obvious we come on different sides of the issues. I have to start getting ready however. I just shared to share a NEW article.

    Notice I do not splash the victims of gun violence on the front page. Only the laws relating to the discussion of them. If I was extremely biased. I'd update every time there was a mass shooting with a little article. I try at least to keep things balanced.
    Yes, and I already stated why 'overwhelming attention' was given to it. It's popular, and fashionable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  13. #11793
    Scarab Lord Zoranon's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    4,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I could have kept it to ten articles on the front page. I only keep the articles down to five. I re-recycle them out every week in favor of newer ones instead of clogging up the front page with every article on it. The overwhelming attention to it and numerous articles is more then a few. Again we have to agree to disagree. It's obvious we come on different sides of the issues. I have to start getting ready however. I just shared to share a NEW article.

    Notice I do not splash the victims of gun violence on the front page. Only the laws relating to the discussion of them. If I was extremely biased. I'd update every time there was a mass shooting with a little article. I try at least to keep things balanced.

    As for poster above me. It's not factually incorrect statements. I posted a POLL. How many times must I repeat that. I also follow the news extremely close on most of major news networks. I know what the chances of his re-election through several sources and I combine all the information to make my own point of view.

    Again you ignored me poster above me, so thankfully I do not have to continue to entertain you're misguided point of view of me posting false statements..
    Oh please. You cannot try to pull of the unbiased poster act with the posting history you have.

    a) Almost all of your posts follow the anti-gun pattern
    b) You admitted being a part of an anti-gun movement

    You cant have it both ways, you cannot pretend to be a neutral observer and party hack at the same time.
    Quote Originally Posted by b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  14. #11794
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.
    Nice post, but the initial argument you posit is a straw man. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting, it's about protection from tyranny. For fun here are a few quotes from the guys who wrote and voted on this idea (:

    “Disarm the people- that is the best and most effective way to enslave them.” James Madison

    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, co-author 2nd Amendment

    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Thomas Jefferson

  15. #11795
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    The point is

    A: Mitch is up for re-election in 2014. 55 percent of people in his own state do not approve of his is job. It's quite transparent he will lose to a Dem in an upcoming election

    B: You don't need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all you need. Shooting more into an open area in my humble point of view is reckless.

    C: It shows the progressive action now starting to target those who are blocking common sense gun reform. Instead of hoping they will pass something. They are targeting people who are blocking it up

    D: Money does not equal how a measure will pass. If that was true. Romney outspent Obama yet still lost the election despite a large gap in money.

    I'm not sure why the money matters. But you asked so the purpose of bringing it up.
    Really? Ar-15 is NO DIFFERENT THAN A WOODEN STOCK .223 HUNTING RIFLE. Kind of like these which you repeatedly ignore:


    Top is ok the second one is not? Why? They're the same action, same trigger group, same caliber so...?

    Which the .223 rem happens to be a a favorite of many for varmint hunting, fox, coyotes, coons, ect.

    What do you know about hunting? Have you ever been hunting? How about in the woods of appalachia? Ever turned a corner in the woods and walked into a bear or a wild hog? There's a reason that many hunters carry guns with higher capacity magazines and its not for what they're hunting, it's for whats hunting them.
    As for prot... haha losers he dmg needs a nerf with the intercept shield bash wtf silence crit a clothie like a mofo.
    Wow.

  16. #11796
    I am Murloc! GreatOak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Chicago, USA
    Posts
    5,106
    One of those guns is more tacticool so it shoots 100 bullets a second, never runs out of bullets, and kills as many people as possible in a scarier way.
    In the fell clutch of circumstance
    I have not winced nor cried aloud.
    Under the bludgeonings of chance
    My head is bloody, but unbowed.

  17. #11797
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatOak View Post
    One of those guns is scarier.
    Fixed that for you, since the anti-gun crowd doesn't understand things like cyclic rates, lethality, and internal firing mechanisms. The modified quote sums up their arguments a little better.

  18. #11798
    The Insane Kujako's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In the woods, doing what bears do.
    Posts
    17,987
    What I found deeply amusing is that the official definition of an assault weapon in the last federal ban says that an assault riffle has any two of the following characteristics.

    1.Folding or telescoping stock
    2.Pistol grip
    3.Bayonet mount
    4.Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
    5.Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).

    So you could stick a grenade launcher on a wood stock basic rifle and it would be legal. But a pistol grip and folding stock would not be. Some how, I find a grenade launcher to be more of a threat then a pistol grip and folding stock.
    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.

    -Kujako-

  19. #11799
    I am Murloc! GreatOak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Chicago, USA
    Posts
    5,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Kujako View Post
    What I found deeply amusing is that the official definition of an assault weapon in the last federal ban says that an assault riffle has any two of the following characteristics.

    1.Folding or telescoping stock
    2.Pistol grip
    3.Bayonet mount
    4.Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
    5.Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).

    So you could stick a grenade launcher on a wood stock basic rifle and it would be legal. But a pistol grip and folding stock would not be. Some how, I find a grenade launcher to be more of a threat then a pistol grip and folding stock.

    Don't forget about the drive-by bayonetings
    In the fell clutch of circumstance
    I have not winced nor cried aloud.
    Under the bludgeonings of chance
    My head is bloody, but unbowed.

  20. #11800
    So the NRA said they'd support background checks after Sandy Hook, and now...what bullshit hypocrites.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •