Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shadowlord]

Was that some kind of trick, the kind of thing that Sarah Palin would call a gotcha question?

See, I thought you said "assault weapon," which is the term in use in US (past, and present) laws and, so far as I have noticed, in the "liberal media" - which means a completely different thing than "assault rifle."

Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms.[1] The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.[1][2] Some firearms are specified by name.[3] At the time that the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban passed in 1994, the U.S. Justice Department said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."[3] The origin of the term has been attributed to legislators, gun control groups, the media, and the firearms industry itself.[4][5][6][1] It is sometimes conflated with the term "assault rifle", which refers to selective-fire military rifles that can fire in automatic and / or burst mode.[5]

[chaoticag]

A semi-automatic rifle. A rifle is not an assault rifle if it is does not use cartridges of intermediate power or cannot fire more than one bullet per trigger pull.

Merriam-Webster disagrees.

Also, the way people use words disagrees. We know full well what we're talking about here.

Also, yeah, if it's a modification away from being an effective assault rifle by your definition, then I really don't care. It was designed for military use then modified not for civilian use, to hit legal standard for sale to civilians.

[Vilanat]

That is, again, a well fabricated spin. It's either that those who opposed selling of rifles to civilians came up with that definition so they could slowly and gradually chip into the previous law, knowing that outright banning every M16 variant would be impossible, or that the gun sellers thought this distinction was the best way to keep selling those rifles.

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

[Sonlirain]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

It's also the mode they use ALL THE TIME when not suppressing things or laying down covering fire so basically:

Full auto - scare people (and kill some)
Semi auto - Scare people and kill/wound LOADS.

[Shadowlord]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

Well, then, what would you suggest as a solution to this problem, and the related problem of rampant shootings in cities with pistols? We can say "we should fix the conditions which give rise to violence" but how, and in the meantime, what would you do to try to reduce the damage and deaths from shootings? (Ignore suicides or not, it's up to you)

P.S. chaoticag: Wikipedia says that 'assault rifle' comes from Nazi Germany, not the dictionary. (No, really, it does:)

The term assault rifle is generally attributed to Adolf Hitler, who for propaganda purposes used the German word "Sturmgewehr" (which translates to "assault rifle"), as the new name for the MP43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44 or StG 44.[8][11][12][13][14][15]

[SirQuiamus]

No-one really cares whether your boomstick is fully-automatic, semi-automatic, quasi-automatic, pseudo-automatic, or what the fuck ever. If you point it at people and pull the trigger, it's bad.

[chaoticag]

Well, while I didn't know that, the point to get across is that the way we're using it so far fits the normal everyday use term. And well, I really don't think the conversation is so technical it warrants us going into super technical details like that.

[Morrigi]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

Well, then, what would you suggest as a solution to this problem, and the related problem of rampant shootings in cities with pistols? We can say "we should fix the conditions which give rise to violence" but how, and in the meantime, what would you do to try to reduce the damage and deaths from shootings? (Ignore suicides or not, it's up to you)

P.S. chaoticag: Wikipedia says that 'assault rifle' comes from Nazi Germany, not the dictionary. (No, really, it does:)

The term assault rifle is generally attributed to Adolf Hitler, who for propaganda purposes used the German word "Sturmgewehr" (which translates to "assault rifle"), as the new name for the MP43, subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44 or StG 44.[8][11][12][13][14][15]

Yes, the StG-44 is the granddaddy of all assault rifles.

Well, while I didn't know that, the point to get across is that the way we're using it so far fits the normal everyday use term. And well, I really don't think the conversation is so technical it warrants us going into super technical details like that.

If we're talking about legal change, we must define our terms. Otherwise, stupid shit like the 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" happens.

[Vilanat]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

Well, then, what would you suggest as a solution to this problem, and the related problem of rampant shootings in cities with pistols? We can say "we should fix the conditions which give rise to violence" but how, and in the meantime, what would you do to try to reduce the damage and deaths from shootings? (Ignore suicides or not, it's up to you)

The solution is pretty simple, i think. a complete ban on sales of non-hunting rifles. This brings back my previous take on this debate which i didn't care to reply to, since i got a rather rude response, but no, an M16 variant is not a hunting weapon, even though you can hunt with it, just like i can hunt with an FN Minimi or Negev LMG.

Since i can't imagine ordinary people with an M24 (Remington 700) killing 50 people in a night club, i'd say those types are relatively more reasonable weapons to sell to civilians who wish to hunt (Although if you already asked for my opinion then hunting for sport should be made completely illegal even before banning weapon sales).

As for handguns, well, the case for self defense is a somewhat reasonable one. i'd say a couple of months waiting period, periodic psychological evaluations, clear criminal records and mandatory training every half a year could suffice. it probably wont stop gun violence casualties completely, but it might somewhat reduce it.

[TheBiggerFish]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

Well, then, what would you suggest as a solution to this problem, and the related problem of rampant shootings in cities with pistols? We can say "we should fix the conditions which give rise to violence" but how, and in the meantime, what would you do to try to reduce the damage and deaths from shootings? (Ignore suicides or not, it's up to you)

The solution is pretty simple, i think. a complete ban on sales of non-hunting rifles. This brings back my previous take on this debate which i didn't care to reply to, since i got a rather rude response, but no, an M16 variant is not a hunting weapon, even though you can hunt with it, just like i can hunt with an FN Minimi or Negev LMG.

Since i can't imagine ordinary people with an M24 (Remington 700) killing 50 people in a night club, i'd say those types are relatively more reasonable weapons to sell to civilians who wish to hunt (Although if you already asked for my opinion then hunting for sport should be made completely illegal even before banning weapon sales).

As for handguns, well, the case for self defense is a somewhat reasonable one. i'd say a couple of months waiting period, periodic psychological evaluations, clear criminal records and mandatory training every half a year could suffice. it probably wont stop gun violence casualties completely, but it might somewhat reduce it.

I could get behind this plan so much.

[chaoticag]

I can't imagine this flying in the US either, but as I understand it, over here if you want to own a handgun, someone needs to sign with you a paper holding the both of you responsible for what might happen with the gun. This way you get someone vouching for you as well as shouldering the responsibility of your gun use. I'm not too interested in owning a gun though, so I wouldn't know what limitations are in place to prevent abuses of the system, but it seems better than just having the owner himself responsible at least.

[smirk]

From the functional side of things, a semi automatic rifle is even more dangerous than an automatic one, since semi-auto is the shooting mode trained soldiers use to kill as effectively as possible.

Well, then, what would you suggest as a solution to this problem, and the related problem of rampant shootings in cities with pistols? We can say "we should fix the conditions which give rise to violence" but how, and in the meantime, what would you do to try to reduce the damage and deaths from shootings? (Ignore suicides or not, it's up to you)

The solution is pretty simple, i think. a complete ban on sales of non-hunting rifles. This brings back my previous take on this debate which i didn't care to reply to, since i got a rather rude response, but no, an M16 variant is not a hunting weapon, even though you can hunt with it, just like i can hunt with an FN Minimi or Negev LMG.

Since i can't imagine ordinary people with an M24 (Remington 700) killing 50 people in a night club, i'd say those types are relatively more reasonable weapons to sell to civilians who wish to hunt (Although if you already asked for my opinion then hunting for sport should be made completely illegal even before banning weapon sales).

As for handguns, well, the case for self defense is a somewhat reasonable one. i'd say a couple of months waiting period, periodic psychological evaluations, clear criminal records and mandatory training every half a year could suffice. it probably wont stop gun violence casualties completely, but it might somewhat reduce it.

I could get behind this plan so much.

It would be pretty great. Unfortunately for the US, the Senate Democrats had to filibuster for almost 15 hours the other day to even get to hold a vote on extending background checks to gun shows and internet sales, and excluding people on the motherfucking federal terrorist watch list from obtaining gun licenses. We've got a long goddamn way to go.

[TheBiggerFish]

To be fair, the federal terrorist watchlist is kinda crap, AFAIK.

[smirk]

It's not great, but we've gotta start somewhere. Because "X solution isn't great, so we shouldn't do anything" cannot be allowed to be a real answer anymore.

[TheBiggerFish]

All the same that solution is carp.