Gun Control

[Redux]

9 minutes ago, Stumpy1 said:

"Assault weapons" is also misleading.  What constitutes as a weapon and when does it become an "assault weapon"? 

 

When you assault someone with something, that's when.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Redux

[zoogs]

^False, and misleading.

[Redux]

Just now, zoogs said:

^False, and misleading.

 

As is "Assault Style".

[ZRod]

Why is it so hard to agree that we need to start somewhere, and if it's not enough continue refining regulations to save lives?

 

 

Yes mechanically and to an extent functionally all semi autos are the same. However, the pistol grip improves "performance", as does increased mag size, foldable stocks, etc.

Edited March 1, 2018 by ZRod

[zoogs]

No assault weapons ban has ever been discussed with the kind of ludicrous, strawman classification framework you are pretending is being proposed.

[Redux]

Just now, zoogs said:

No assault weapons ban has ever been discussed with the kind of ludicrous, strawman classification framework you are pretending is being proposed.

 

Guessing you didn't read my post above

2 minutes ago, ZRod said:

Why is it so hard to agree that we need to start somewhere, and if it's not enough continue refining regulations to save lives?

 

 

Yes mechanically and to an extent functionally all semi autos are the same. However, the pistol grip improves "performance", as does increased mag size, foldable stocks, etc.

 

Guessing you didn't either

[RedDenver]

42 minutes ago, Redux said:

This is a pretty informative video on what an AR-15 can do and what the Bump Stock does once installed.

 

 

The Bump Stock is what turns a normal semi auto into nearly a fully automatic true assault grade/military grade weapon.  It is legal, and clearly easy to purchase.  This should not be the case.  I'm all for making them illegal to own and purchase.  But the thing that gets ignored because the gun in these videos looks like a military weapon and not like the hunting rifle on your Dad's gun rack, is that even without the modifications the AR-15 (and almost all hunting rifles that function the same way) still fire pretty damn quickly as this video shows.  So let's just be honest for a moment.  We discuss banning the bump stock, fine most would agree that is a noble cause.  That wouldn't be enough though, next it will be banning rifles of this functionality from cosmetically looking like a military grade weapon.  And I'll be honest, I know full well that the original allure of the AR-15 was that it looked the part.  So fine, we've banned bump stocks, banned certain cosmetics, and maybe that solves some problems.  But we will still have normal looking hunting rifles, modification techniques (legal or not) that will be available to most anyone.  As this guy in the video does, he goes and purchases the gun quickly and easily and even passes the background check that many want to make harder (fair enough, I would even go further and reintroduce the waiting period).

 

I'm not going to pretend that guns are some kind of necessary right.  But I also want to drop the charade that is pretending certain guns or certain mods are the main culprit.  The illegal firearms will stay illegal and maybe some more will become illegal.  The problem is hate and the problem is availability.  Banning all guns and taking them away from honest citizens won't work, and even if it did...hate will still exist.  Hate will still find ways to obtain these weapons or other kinds.  Banning the AR won't do much long term except some kind of moral victory for those wanting guns to disappear.

I agree with you all the way until the bolded. Dozens of other countries that have banned/regulated guns don't have anywhere near the mass killings that we have in the US. Hate will indeed always find a way to hurt others, but we don't have to help the hateful out with easily obtained weapons that can cause mass killings. There's legitimate reasons not to ban all guns, but let's not pretend like there's no good outcomes of that. But I agree that just banning the AR won't make a whole lot of difference.

 

As for your general disagreement with "assault weapons" or "assault-style weapons" being made-up, that's true of all words and phrases. If your argument is with the definition being unclear, then by all means clarify it or propose another word/phrase to capture the intent or distinguish between nuanced meanings.

[zoogs]

"I support a renewed assault weapons ban, I just think assault weapons are a made up noncategory and we're fine because assault RIFLES are illegal already."

 

Help us out here.

[Redux]

2 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I agree with you all the way until the bolded. Dozens of other countries that have banned/regulated guns don't have anywhere near the mass killings that we have in the US. Hate will indeed always find a way to hurt others, but we don't have to help the hateful out with easily obtained weapons that can cause mass killings. There's legitimate reasons not to ban all guns, but let's not pretend like there's no good outcomes of that. But I agree that just banning the AR won't make a whole lot of difference.

 

As for your general disagreement with "assault weapons" or "assault-style weapons" being made-up, that's true of all words and phrases. If your argument is with the definition being unclear, then by all means clarify it or propose another word/phrase to capture the intent or distinguish between nuanced meanings.

 

In my opinion an "assault weapon" is one that is used for assualt, could be anything from a pistol to a hammer.  "Military style" would be more appropriate but even then not accurate seeing as functionality is the supposed target and the AR unless moded is not a military weapon.  Calling the AR anything other than a semi auto is inaccurate really, the bunp stocks and mods are what chanfe its classification.  It's the sports car of hunting rifles.

4 minutes ago, zoogs said:

"I support a renewed assault weapons ban, I just think assault weapons are a made up noncategory and we're fine because assault RIFLES are illegal already."

 

Help us out here.

 

I wish I could

[zoogs]

Quote

Calling the AR anything other than a semi auto is inaccurate really

 

"I didn't say I opposed the assault weapons ban, but the AR-15 types must not be included because that would be inaccurate".

 

The picture grows clearer.

[RedDenver]

5 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

In my opinion an "assault weapon" is one that is used for assualt, could be anything from a pistol to a hammer.  "Military style" would be more appropriate but even then not accurate seeing as functionality is the supposed target and the AR unless moded is not a military weapon.  Calling the AR anything other than a semi auto is inaccurate really, the bunp stocks and mods are what chanfe its classification.  It's the sports car of hunting rifles.

Instead of a ban on a "style" of weapon, I'd be in favor of a regulation on the rate of fire (although I think that'd be hard to do) and/or the max ammo before reloading. Would either of those be more palatable for you?

[Redux]

3 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Instead of a ban on a "style" of weapon, I'd be in favor of a regulation on the rate of fire (although I think that'd be hard to do) and/or the max ammo before reloading. Would either of those be more palatable for you?

 

Yeah I think fire rate is an issue that could be addressed pretty reasonably from both sides.  The vid I posted above show how easy fire rate can be modded, preventing this should help curb some peoples objections to the weapons in general.  Although fire rate doesn't prevent harm specifically, more so just how much harm.  I guess my point is, a standard AR does the exact same damage as a wodden hunting rifle.

 

6 minutes ago, zoogs said:

 

"I didn't say I opposed the assault weapons ban, but the AR-15 types must not be included because that would be inaccurate".

 

The picture grows clearer.

 

Are you seriously doing this?  You need to take a breather man.

Edited March 1, 2018 by Redux

[RedDenver]

Just now, Redux said:

 

Yeah I think fire rate is an issue that could be addressed pretty reasonably from both sides.  The vid I posted above show how easy fire rate can be modded, preventing this should help curb some peoples objections to the weapons in general.  Although fire rate doesn't prevent harm specifically, more so just how much harm.  I guess my point is, a standard AR does the exact same damage as a wodden hunting rifle.

I agree, which is why I think we have to address not the style but rather the performance/capability of the weapon.

[Redux]

5 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I agree, which is why I think we have to address not the style but rather the performance/capability of the weapon.

 

But hunting rifles can be modded as well, yet nobody classifies them as "assualt style", well not that I know of I guess.  Armalite should start preventing modifications in some fashion.

[RedDenver]

3 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

But hunting rifles can be modded as well, yet nobody classifies them as "assualt style", well not that I know of I guess.  Armalite should start preventing modifications in some fashion.

I'm agreeing with you: banning a style (like "assault style") is the wrong way to go.