| Author | Message | ||
     Sifo |
Why don't you want to answer this question? Why don't you answer any of my questions? Or other people's questions. | ||
| Union_man |
I have been trying. One against all are my odds here. No way I can hit them all. Well why do they choose them? Chicken to answer huh? | ||
| Sifo |
Well why do they choose them? Chicken to answer huh? They don't. They choose many weapons. How many times must this be answered. Most killings are NOT done with these guns. The numbers aren't even close. Clinging to this falsehood makes it clear that you have no intent of rational discussion. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Because Bushmasters are on the low budget end of that type of weapon and also very widely available as opposed to many of the higher quality weapons of this type. It is economic thing. | ||
| Union_man |
Your are right "most killings" are not caused by assault weapons. Nice try to deflect. It's your MO. But... Mass Shootings is what I am talking about. They are why we are having this discussion. I know you won't answer. | ||
| Sifo |
Union_man, how many mass shootings have used these weapons as opposed to other guns. The simple answer is that more are done with other guns. Why? An AR-15 is a bitch to conceal. What weapons did Charles Whitman use? What what used by the shooter of Gaby Giffords and the rest of the people he shot? I know the point you are trying to make is that they are effective weapons. That is what also makes them good for hunting, target shooting, plinking and home defense. Then again, a pistol is very effective at many things in other ways. Here's the problem though. You want to ban effective weapons, but the reality is that the next best choice is still VERY effective. This leads to banning everything all the way down to where England is now at, banning long kitchen knives. Please try to advance the discussion. | ||
| Old_guy |
Inner city youths have been killing each other in droves for years with any tool at their disposal. Guns, of any type, knives, cars, drugs and fists. As long as its not in the suburbs the anti-gun crowd could care less (bunch of Hypocrites). Although they account for probably 85 to 90 percent of the homicides every year, I would be willing to bet that less than 1% of the shootings in the inner cities involved an AR/AK type of weapon. BTW, I was a Cop in DC for 11 years, with 5 years in the narcotics unit. (Message edited by old_guy on January 01, 2013) | ||
| Sifo |
Because Bushmasters are on the low budget end of that type of weapon and also very widely available as opposed to many of the higher quality weapons of this type. It is economic thing. I think it's more of a copy cat, fashion thing. There have been a few in the past year or so where AR-15s have been used. The have the scary "assault rifle" look. Black plastic is EVIL looking. If it were about economics, they would be choosing AKs. They are far cheaper, available, and use more deadly ammo, and still have high capacity mags. At the range of these shootings, the loss of long distance accuracy vs. the AR platform is meaningless. | ||
| Aesquire |
I already answered. You have been lied to. Multiple times and you seem to buy all the hype. There is NO such thing as an assault weapon. It's a marketing term. Like "Tactical". In sporting goods, if it's black, it's tactical. If it's camo, it's hunting. Assault weapon is made up for the express purpose of conning you into believing that a century old rifle design, or anything black, or anything that looks even slightly modern military is evil!!! Evil!!!! The marketing dept for plastic boxes, and other things doesn't help sometimes, in the "visual" dept. Zombie gear, black & horrid green is cashing in on a joke, and a bad movies. Patriots admire the armed forces, and the modern military look sells. Black fancy slings with multiple buckles and quick releases! Tactical! Tacticool! Marketing. 50 years ago, 100 years ago, same deal. The American Army Rifle has always been the standard weapon for hunting and target shooting. Surplus packs, harnesses and canteens have been the standard middle class, Jacksonian, Rural fashion statement since the Revolution. "Mass Shootings is what I am talking about" Most mass shootings are with pistols. There are a few cases in the recent past using that particular "Bushmaster" brand, the reason explored well above. You'll find Glock, S&W, etc. brand names on the majority of gun related deaths just because of numbers sold and statistics. Again, Marketing to deceive you. "Bushmaster" sounds cool/evil/snakey! So the company tries to make money on a "cool" name and the anti-constitution folk try to fool you. Again, you have been lied to. Don't buy the propaganda. | ||
| Ninefortheroad |
Sifo, Good point, it may not be solely economics. I was not considering other similar weapons but staying with the popularity of AR-15 weapons. Bushmaster is widely available and the Bushmaster name does mean a lot to the un-informed. It is less expensive that a Colt, BCM, LMT, Noveske ect. Yes, it may not be all economics but strongly factored by brand recognition then by cost of the weapon. Availability also is a major variable, Bushmaster are (were) widely available. | ||
| Nm5150 |
No weapon of any kind has ever caused a mass killing.Quit treating the symptom and go after the disease.I would say IMHO but this is so simple there shouldn't even be a discussion about weapons.DUH! | ||
| Sifo |
Time to support some actual FACTS! http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-s hootings-map  You can clearly see that in the most recent 30 years, almost twice as many mass shootings were done with pistols (semi-auto handgun) as "assault weapons". Add revolvers in and compare hand guns to "assault weapons" and it's way over double. The bottom line Union_man, is that you keep wanting people to address a false assertion. You are simply wrong on this. End of story. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
What the government will give to you with the left hand, it has stolen from someone else with the right. quibble all you want about why Feinstein is up in against the gun that wasnt even used in the latest event..... then ask yourself why Holder & crew and their efforts put grenade launchers, 50 cals, hi cap mags, AKs, and ARs in the hands of KNOWN criminals ; aka Mexican Drug Cartels you trust the administration that would walk this munitions across the border (which they cannot and refuse to secure) and you are going to will fully believe their line on gun violence? duplicitous sanctamoanious F-tards. I don't trust them at all. (and it ain't got a Gdamn thing to do with the color of his skin) | ||
| Sifo |
It's amazing how fast progressives actually get to saying ban knives! Really, knives! What comes after knives? | ||
| Union_man |
Aesquire For purposes of this discussion; I would like you to suggest a term that we may use to describe the type of weapon AKA "War Weapons". You know, the ones that are just slight variations of those used by Military Forces worldwide. You know what I am talking about. Your attempt to avoid naming them is chickenshit. When I say "Shotgun" everyone draws a mental picture even though not all shotguns are the same. Sifo, I agree, let's get at the facts. Your graph, assuming it factual, should be a part of the discussion. I am not advocating banning semi-auto handguns. Although, I would like to hear someone justify the need to posses this without limit, restriction, or license.  Inexpensive, inaccurate. The designs intent is to spray bullets and to kill people. This was the same argument that was used, and prevailed in the Thirties. Again, I carry concealed. I feel naked when I am not carrying. As a Motorcyclist, I think that a National Carry Permit should be available. I want to carry while traveling. | ||
| Oldog |
Again, I carry concealed. I feel naked when I am not carrying. As a Motorcyclist, I think that a National Carry Permit should be available. I want to carry while traveling. When the party in power succeeds in banning private ownership making it against the law then what, stay home? Supporting any anti gun legislation opens the doors for despots Oh and Consider avoiding Illinois, Permitting and local ordinances fall under states rights / local rights. There is that pesky constitution again. } | ||
| Oldog |
The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed The politicoes would do well to remember that the CONSTITUTION is what gives them any authority at all. | ||
| Sifo |
Funny to hear you talking about "war weapons" and posting this picture... You won't find that magazine on a battle field. You probably won't find it used by gang bangers either. If someone feels the need for home defense, that would be their choice, not mine though. How many shootings actually happen with that sort of magazine anyway? ANY? I really don't know. Few enough, I'm sure, that it pretty much a non-issue statistically. So why worry about banning them? Put the stock mag in any you just have a stock Glock. So here's a question for your Union_man... How do you justify ignoring our Constitution in your quest to ban these weapons? Please answer the question. Don't be a chickenshit. The politicoes would do well to remember that the CONSTITUTION is what gives them any authority at all.  | ||
| Sifo |
Seriously, we need to look into banning high capacity minivans. They just have too much potential to kill off entire families in a single crash. It's time to ban any motor vehicle with a capacity of more than three occupants.  | ||
| Macbuell |
Cars killed three times as many people as guns in 2010. Since cars kill so many people every year, far more than guns, perhaps we should ban cars? Afterall, it would make people safer. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"I am not advocating banning semi-auto handguns. Although, I would like to hear someone justify the need to posses this without limit, restriction, or license." Those mags are actually for carbine rifles like Hi-Point and KelTec. Do they fit the Glock? you bet, but you'd have an awful time trying to conceal that. A perp would use two 15-16 round mags instead of that oe the 100 round drum mag system made for Glock. | ||
| S21125r |
Union Man, So a shotgun is a shotgun? You don't apply a special name to any civi shotguns that look like they could be used for war purposes? Even if they really are functionally the same as mil versions? | ||
| Nukeblue |
my buddy uses that same glock/mag combo in shooting steel competitions. works very well & allows many hits before reloading which gives him an edge. sporting purpose unionman | ||
| Psykick_machanik |
JUSTIFY.......are you serious? The constitution exsists to protect our RIGHTS!! We do not have to justify our rights!!!! So should everyone justify the use of profanity or equal rights? I am just sick and tired of hearing people use that "justify" line. Its a ridiculous meaningless point. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
standard over under vs AA-10. not all shot guns are created equal. Would I want an AA-10; Damn straight. can I get one ? not legally (yo habla espgagnol un pokito - so maybe I can after all! ") with the right amount of force, speed, pressure and targeted at the right critical location - any object can be used to murder kill death (all this banning is sounding too much like demolition man) Go look at how many deaths happen every year in the prison system. Completely 'unarmed' population. You should see the training we did for entrenching shovels - | ||
| Buelltoys |
I like my high capacity magazines because I hate loading at the range. If I want to take out the AK, AR, Bolt action and pistols I would spend more time reloading my magazines then putting lead down range. I have about 5 magazines per weapon and if I have 30/mag riffle, and 15/mag pistol I can spend more time during hot range shooting then loading. Weapons of war are automatic selective fire weapons. They are restricted to pre '86 and need a federal license to own by a civilian. I agree with City: Any weapon that our government will give away to other countries should be able to be had by an American. | ||
| Geedee |
Here's your friend City. “Give me the child until he is seven and I’ll give you the man”. attributed to St. Francis Xavier | ||
| Geedee |
Perfect! Job done  . | ||
| Kenm123t |
Union Rights do not have to be justified to any one. The Constitution didnt grant rights it affirmed the rights we already have. (Message edited by Kenm123t on January 02, 2013) | ||
| Old_guy |
One of the problems with the terms, Tactical, Military style or "war" weapon is this: This gun  and this gun  are functionally the same. Both can fire eight 12 ga. 3 inch magnums in about 3 seconds. In fact when properly equipped the first gun can hold more rounds than the second one. A military weapon is nothing but a hunting rifle adapted to war use. Both are tools and as we know tools can be used the wrong way or the right way. Its up to the operator of the tool. |
