Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 01-16-2013, 10:14 PM  
Administrator
 
samfloor's Avatar

Missouri
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,845 | Kudos: +114
Truth about assault weapons

http://www.assaultweapon.info/
__________________

__________________
AKA....Rusty, Floorist, etc.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 11:07 PM  
Senior Member
 
havasu's Avatar

California
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,747 | Kudos: +238
Images: 17
Nice post Rusty!
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 11:47 AM  
Ric
Senior Member

Denver, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 232 | Kudos: +28
Images: 6
agreed.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:59 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
Quote:
Originally Posted by samfloor View Post
One of the most informative posts on "so-called" assault weapons that I have ever seen. Obviously assault weapon is a political and lamestream media preferred terminology.

My only experience with fully automatic weapons other than 30 and 50 caliber machine guns was the 30 cal carbine with a selector. It was fun to fire (ammo was free in the 82nd) and we mostly used auto to finish off the ammo we had with us on the range.
__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 04:43 PM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
Politicians when combined with the media would be funny if we weren't on the losing end. Consider the 1994 assault weapon ban for example;

"any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher."

It seems from the above that one could have their high cap magazine or clip and one more option from a list of five;
1. A folding or telescopic stock.
2. A conspicuous pistol grip.
3. A bayonet mount.
4. A flash suppressor or threaded barrel.
5. A grenade launcher.

Why does a multiple of options make the rifle so deadly, and how many of the five could be added to any weapon after purchase?
__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:03 AM  
Senior Member

Kent, Ohio
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,237 | Kudos: +67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie_T View Post
Politicians when combined with the media would be funny if we weren't on the losing end. Consider the 1994 assault weapon ban for example;

"any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher."

It seems from the above that one could have their high cap magazine or clip and one more option from a list of five;
1. A folding or telescopic stock.
2. A conspicuous pistol grip.
3. A bayonet mount.
4. A flash suppressor or threaded barrel.
5. A grenade launcher.

Why does a multiple of options make the rifle so deadly, and how many of the five could be added to any weapon after purchase?
The only part of the firearm that is regulated is the receiver. None of those components are a part of the receiver; all can be attached to a receiver. The first 4 can be purchased without any sort of federal-level restrictions.

A grenade launcher is already federally regulated as a Destructive Device. However, a functionally similar device exists that is designed to project flares. I'm not sure if this device is regulated as a firearm, but I would suspect not.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:22 AM  
Administrator
 
samfloor's Avatar

Missouri
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,845 | Kudos: +114
Stole this from the Glock forum.
The upper rifle would be legal, the lower one would be illegal under the 1994 ban and the new one proposed by the California senator.
Truth about assault weapons-musketscomparison.jpg 

__________________
AKA....Rusty, Floorist, etc.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:37 AM  
Senior Member

Greenville, SC
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,141 | Kudos: +188
Quote:
Originally Posted by samfloor View Post
Stole this from the Glock forum.
The upper rifle would be legal, the lower one would be illegal under the 1994 ban and the new one proposed by the California senator.
Man, that's funny..
__________________
"A society that puts equality ... ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom."

--Milton Friedman (1912-2006)
Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2013, 09:43 AM  
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,892 | Kudos: +92
WLOS hosted a town hall meeting and one comment that came out was that the AR-15 type weapons were called "assault weapons" just because they looked ugly and scary. In truth isn't every weapon an assault weapon? Try the dictionary, "something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy."
__________________

__________________
I remember when power tools and small appliances had flexible cords.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.