M
Society Why do Regular Citizens Need Assault Weapons?
- Thread starter member 3289
- Start date
-
- Tags
- why
The AR goes deeper.Derringer's shoot a larger round than the AR15's.
That's the one. Look mighty scary don't it?Like this?
That never happened.
If you come to Canada you can do both.It's all good. Come to Texas sometime and I'll teach you how to shoot Safely and properly.
When I come to England you can teach me how to make dry self-deprecating jokes.
M
member 3289
Guest
Yeah give me some time and I'll sort yous out.
M
member 3289
Guest
Semi auto firearms with detachable magazines were never banned.
If that's true then that's a huge problem.
Not really.
M
member 3289
Guest
Assault weapons were absolutely banned in the U.S. from 1994 to 2004. Part of the identifying process Congress used to define assault weapons was being semi-automatic and having a detachable magazine, among other things.
@ConorMcGregorsBeard just loves to argue semantics, even when multiple people have asked everyone not to argue semantics.Were there semi-automatic weapons with detachable magazines that weren't banned? Yes.
Did I ever indicate otherwise, and is it relevant to this discussion? No.
M
member 3289
Guest
I'd rather not single people out but I guess it's necessary.
@ConorMcGregorsBeard
@Filthy
@Hauler
@the_b00ts:
Do you think you guys can stop arguing minute semantics and try to have a productive discussion?
The most important thing is not you being right. Try to focus.
@ConorMcGregorsBeard
@Filthy
@Hauler
@the_b00ts:Do you think you guys can stop arguing minute semantics and try to have a productive discussion?
The most important thing is not you being right. Try to focus.
You did it several times including that very post.
A gun wasn't banned based on being semi automatic and having a detachable magazine. They were banned for having pistol grips and collapsible stocks. @Splinty already pointed out to you why it was completely illogical.
Not an "assault weapon":
"assault weapon"
Not if you refuse to acknowledge the fault of your own arguments.
The Colt AR-15 was not part of the ban provided it didn't have modifications like a folding stock, a flash suppressor or (lol) a grenade launcher.
Semi auto firearms with detachable magazines were never banned.
It's semi-automatic and it has detachable mags. I use it for target shooting.
So you think my gun should be banned?
It's semi-automatic and it has detachable mags. I use it for target shooting.
Last edited:
I'm not arguing semantics.
I'm trying to see where you guys think the line should be. There is a lot of misinformation about the AR-15 platform, so I'm looking for specific issues with that particular weapon over other types of similar weapons.
PROJECTILES!
Semi auto firearms with detachable magazines were never banned.
So you think my gun should be banned?
It's semi-automatic and it has detachable mags. I use it for target shooting.
maybe it should. You could still protect your house iwth a regular pistol or shotgun right?
You could still go hunting iwth a standard shotgun right?
So is it worth it to be able to shoot fancy guns at the range, given the risk we are in.
Now, my focus is really more on more funding, more law enforcement, more vetting than it is on banning these weapons, just saying.
The gun pictured is just a little pea shooter. I have higher caliber guns that are better suited for protection.
I'm just using this little gun as an example of how silly the "magazine" and "semi-automatic" arguments are.
How does a detachable magazine make a gun “fancy”? I can reload a revolver with speed loaders just as fast as a magazine fed pistol. So by banning magazine fed weapons, what are you accomplishing?
