Best
180 Comments
Post
  • #14
    !
    the irony of this entire debate is that someone fairly familiar and competent with a shotgun can do more damage to more people more quickly than any semi auto gun. And shotguns are legal in almost every country in the world.
  • #24
    !
    @Food4thoughts He took his mother's guns. He shot each kid a minimum of 4 times. He knew how to pull a trigger. he did not know how to walk and shoot and load constantly thereby never being out of firepower. When you ban semi auto rifles they will use semi auto pistols (some of whom are larger caliber and more devastating at close range). When you ban semi auto handguns they will use a shotgun. And they will learn to walk and shoot and load. The lunatic was insane. Most are. But they are not stupid. they will learn to do the same with a shotgun.
  • #25
    !
    @Food4thoughts That's true. I don't know your view on the assault weapon ban but say they do it and the next sandy hook the guy uses the shotgun, what then?
  • R Load more replies

  • #9
    !
    I do not define them as such. The label is misleading and it was in fact coined by the VPC in an effort to confuse the difference between full auto and semi auto. The idea behind it was to scare the American public into believing that those semi autos were no different than full autos and thus support a ban on certain semi autos. The fact is that full auto has been so restricted for a long time that the public does not understand that and you know how people react when they do not understand something.
  • #10
    !
    "How would you define an assault weapon?"
    I think a news outlet that intends to profit on dividing our nation and who therefore tries to frame every current event question in terms of "liberal" vs "conservative" is using language as an assault weapon. Oh, the damage is seldom fatal or immediate but it is insidious and destructive to civil discourse, problem solving and the long term well-being of our nation. Sort of a meme assault weapon, I'd say.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #101
    !
    @PoliticalSpice Same with MSDNC... errr MSNBC. They are 180 in the opposite. Obviously you don't support the First Amendment. I personally don't care for FOX news, but right or wrong, you can not silence them. Unless of course you claim your position is to abolish the First.
  • #104
    !
    @USailCapital I was actually referring to Politix because they are getting carried away with the "Liberals are cats, Conservatives are dogs" schtick.
  • #108
    !
    @USailCapital perhaps you do not understand that radio/bandwidth soectrum is not freely available. Not anyone can own a telivision station and in that sense it is different then freedom of press where you can print something, or the internet where unlimited numbers of people have access. The govt picks and chooses who are licensed to operate and run tv stations. There used to be a doctrine known as the fairness doctrine. I liked it. It was an fcc regulation that pertained to news broadcast to make sure reporting is, how shall i put this, lets just say... Fair and balanced. I think that should be brought back to cover news broadcast themselves, not necessarily the programing that makes up 90% of the content of fox and a lesser percentage of the content of msnbc.

    Thhere is also another basis, that os those licensed by fcc must operate in the public interest, violation of major laws, a felony conviction, that type of thing ca n result on loss of the broadcast license. Murdock could be denied a license to operate on the basis of the scandel unfolding in england if similar actions were taken here by fox, so there are a whole bunch of basis that ate outside the protection of the first amendment.

    If the first amendment applied i could buy some equipment and set up a tv station right mow, but if i did the govt would shut me down for operating without a license. So if they shut gox down, or decided to transfer the license to a left wing group, that would be fine with me, but it is not sonething I'm calling for, thought the idea of starting a petition is very tempting. If one goes online let me know, then i can decide if i'll sign it.

    But all that is really bedide the point. I made the comment to as a jibe, i don't like the politics of fox, but i don't really want them off the air, but here is the thing, last week people were calling for the firing and some even for imprisonment of a teacher who stompted on a flag, an act protected by the first amendment, i think you were on the opposite side of the issue then. And lest I leave you with the wrong impression i not an absolutest on the first. Canada and Germany both have laws against things like holocaust denial and hate speech, such laws donot end free and spirited debate. Free speech in the u.s. is not absolute either. Their are doctrines sich as the fighting words doctrine, catagories, such as commercial speech, obsenity, etc. that are outside the protections of the first amendment. So dont act as if its a free for all cause its not. Anyone who thinks the teacher who stomped that flag or a protester who burns a flag is not someone whose opinion about the first amendment matters to me.
  • R Load more replies

  • #4
    !
    HMM.....sharp enough to split a skull (machete). Capable to hit a ball 400 feet (baseball bat). Chop down a tree (ax). Can pound nails with one blow (roofing hammer). I'll have more in a minute!
  • #96
    !
    Assault weapon is a automatic rifle. The guns at issue are semi- automatics, thus they are not assault weapons. But if that article is factually correct it means the industry applied the term to semi-automatic weapons as a sales tool. If so its unfair to blame the gun control crowd for using the phrase, since it was gun manufactures and advertizers that popularized it.
  • #176
    !
    @PoliticalSpice My understanding is the definition of assault weapon was defined or rather redefined in the first Federal Assault Weapons Ban in 1994. Basically the federal government is responsible for the blurring the differences between fully and semi autos. Hence the beginning of the confusion.. The sales force jumped on the wagon and label the semis as assault weapons in their displays. I've seen cheezy 22lr's with accessories labeld as such in gun shops. To me I see a rad looking plinker. Others see a scary looking assault weapon. Anything for a sale.
  • #178
    !
    @ProCCW - On the farm here, I have a semi-auto AMT .22 stainless rifle. I like it because of the folding stock being compact. The mag is 25 round capacity. It also has a pistol grip on a composite frame and tough. Unfortunately, due to some of the definitions, that firearm could be considered an assault rifle. Why do I need so many rounds? I've lost 2 calves to wild dog/coyote mix packs. There were seven of them. Now there's only 2.
  • R Load more replies

  • #100
    !
    While understanding what the right is saying about "assault weapons" being an entirely relative term... I'll accept that the "relative term" applies to rifles that look like M-16's or AK-47's.

    That said... Do Lefties understand that banning "assault weapons" won't cut down on mass shootings anymore than banning mustaches will cut down on child molestation?
  • #78
    !
    OMG people, learn something! The term was started in WWII by Hitler with the Stg 44, the first assault rifle. It's a midsize carbine rifle that fires an intermediate powered cartridge as is capable of select fire (meaning being able to select between full auto fire and semi-auto fire.) THAT IS THE REAL DEFINITION by the military for almost 70 years now!

    The know-nothings call anything that looks "evil" an assault weapon.

    PS - I'm a 15 year LE officer and ex Special forces/operations, and have forgotten more about weapons that most people will ever even read about, much less learn.
  • #110
    !
    Again, another right winger who didnt even bother to read the article. Its pointing out that the term 'assualt' was added by the gun manufactures to sale more guns! not people out to take your guns away. jesus. atleast read something before you post your opinion, would ya ? please?
  • #63
    !
    In 1776 a flintlock was considered an assault weapon and for those of you who still don't understand that this is not about guns but getting control of our guns let me explain, a hammer can be used as an assault weapon
  • #173
    !
    I would use an assault rifle for fun target practice out on the range and if a foreign terrorist wants take on America then I will be ready to defend Freedom/Liberty to take out the terrorist.
  • #171
    !
    An"object"similar to a military tank,a bazooka,"howitzer"ca nnon towed behind a vehicle(large enuf and enuf horse power to tow said weapon),cannon on a military battle ship,a submarine torpedo weapon,anything that takes both arms/hands to carry one(1) projectile(fired one(1) at a time),ETC.Get the discription???
  • #164
    !
    Any weapon can be labeled an "Assualt" weapon when used against you. Arguing semantics only detracts from the issue. Issue being are we to be debarred the use of the tools necessary "to secure a free state"?
  • #161
    !
    The Germans invented "Assault Weapons" and the term (sturmgewehren) and METHAMPHETAMINE as well, to keep their soldiers bright-eyed and bushy tailed for longer periods of time than normal! An assault weapon is correctly one that fires a cartridge of a size between a full-size rifle cartridge and a pistol cartridge in BOTH semi-automatic, and full-automatic, or 3-round burst mode. You CAN'T buy those unless you go through BATFE, pay them a couple of hundred dollars a year, pass a stringent background check, bet photographed, fingerprinted, surrender your 4th Amendment rights and let BATFE into your home at any time of the day or night any time they want to check for the weapon and other contraband; and agree to submit an itinerary to BATFE for approval ahead of any scheduled trip you plan to make out of your area of residence BEFORE you make such trip. You also agree to notify every single jurisdiction, municipal, county and state of your coming through their jurisdictions with your "little friend". Needless to say, REAL ASSAULT WEAPONS are very well regulated and registered in the USA.
  • R Load more comments...
Post