Dick’s, Major Gun Retailer, Will Stop Selling Assault-Style Rifles

[cnm]

OMG.....we need to ban full semi-automatics! They is assault weapons!

Hilarious. America's school kids thank you for your desperate deflections. Well, ok, all but 17.

 

[JimH52]

OMG.....we need to ban full semi-automatics! They is assault weapons!

Hilarious. America's school kids thank you for your desperate deflections. Well, ok, all but 17.

This is all a joke to the far right NRAers...Funny....Ha Ha...

 

[cnm]

Playing the "That Isn't What You Call It" game is getting old.

For gun nuts it will never get old. They have nothing else.

 

[SSGT Bags]

Looks like im going to bass pro shop for my fishing line saturday instead of dicks.
Its almost 40 minutes farther away but at least they arent knee jerking faggots

Great! Keep spending more gas being an idiot.

Its no worse than driving 8K miles and putting on a pink pussy hat

Shop wherever you want. It's a free country.

No, it isn't!

 

[JimH52]

I am a gun owner. I like to shoot....BUT THIS IS GETTING OUT OF HAND

 

[cnm]

What makes an assault weapon an assault weapon has not changed,

Nor has what makes a weapon an assault style weapon changed. But keep pretending being obtuse will stop the backlash.

 

[JimH52]

I am a gun owner. I like to shoot....BUT THIS IS GETTING OUT OF HAND

Laughing at 17 dead kids...are u?

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

non-issue. The market will accommodate.

 

[cnm]

You are not very bright...are you? Any semi automatic civilian rifle they sell is the exact same rifle as the AR-15......the only difference is what design covers the firing mechanism..........

You really shouldn't comment on how bright other people are, here's a semi automatic civilian rifle...

 

[cnm]

your [Old Lady] response is not rational or thought out.....

Dude. You don't have the right to comment, based on your irrational posts.

 

[cnm]

No, it is not.

It is not an assault weapon at all.

Keep pretending that if the name is satisfactory to you 17 school kids won't have been killed by one of them.

 

[cnm]

The mechanism is exactly the same for almost all semi-automatic rifles.

Jesus.

And to think these people play the 'naming things' game. Ffs.

 

[Missourian]

Dick's Sporting Goods is a crappy store that caters mostly to millennials who like hiking, camping, and snowboarding. Their selection of firearms is pretty crappy and over-priced, and a couple of them went out of business close to where I live.

The whole thing sounds to me like they're trying to get some free advertising by using the school shooting to boost their sales. Bass Pro Shops and formerly Cabela's are way better.

Exactly what I was going to say. I've been to two in Indiana...great place if you want sportswear with a huge Under Armour logo conspicuously placed in the center of the chest. A store for what we used to call yuppies.

IMO, ALL the sporting goods stores are vastly overpriced for firearms. I'm a huge Bass Pro guy...28 miles from their headquarters and showcase store, but I've never bought a firearm from them. In fact, the wife and I have only ever purchased one FFL firearm from a sporting goods store...a great deal on a shotgun for the wife from Academy.

P.S. - If you've never been to a Dick's, it's a lot like an Academy, but with a bigger focus on attire.

P.P.S. - If you're ever in the Springfield, MO area, do not miss the NRA Firearm Museum at Bass Pro...it is amazing.

 

[cnm]

Great for varmint hunting and a lot of fun.

What varmints have you shot with one?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Hysteria is noted in the outrage by those who believe the 2nd A. is under attack. Of course that is what they've been told by the NRA and those who benefit from the NRA's largess (Trump and many of the Congressional Republicans).

How is it not? Any limitation on a constitutional right puts that right in jeopardy.

Cold and callous disregard from the victims of gun violence is loud and clear when this meme is echoed by fools, easily led by those whose job comes before We the People.

This is pure emotional bullshit and is irrelevant to the proposed limitations of our constitutional rights.

Friends don't let friends vote Republican.

I tend to agree, but for other reasons.

Why did the Militias build armories? Why didn't they give all the arms to every citizen?

Why have the Supreme Court not found the requirements for a citizen to buy or own a fully automatic firearm, aka a Machine Gun or M-16, unless licensed? What did Scalia's argument decide on this issue?

Cherry picked from Scalia's Heller argument:


"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26

"We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.” See 4 Blackstone 148–149 (1769); 3 B. Wilson, Works of the Honourable James Wilson 79 (1804); J. Dunlap, The New-York Justice 8 (1815); C. Humphreys, A Compendium of the Common Law in Force in Kentucky 482 (1822); 1 W. Russell, A Treatise on Crimes and Indictable Misdemeanors 271–272 (1831); H. Stephen, Summary of the Criminal Law 48 (1840); E. Lewis, An Abridgment of the Criminal Law of the United States 64 (1847); F. Wharton, A Treatise on the Criminal Law of the United States 726 (1852). See also State v. Langford, 10 N. C. 381, 383–384 (1824); O’Neill v. State, 16Ala. 65, 67 (1849); English v. State, 35Tex. 473, 476 (1871); State v. Lanier, 71 N. C. 288, 289 (1874).

"It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment ’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right."

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

 

[cnm]

Let's say we ban the AR platform. Then what?

Then you ban the AK platform.

 

[cnm]

It is rarely the preferred weapon in a CQB situation (like a mass shooting).

Except that mass shooters have shown they prefer it you are exactly right.

 

[task0778]

Are they also going to stop selling all of those other 205 types of firearms that the Dems are now trying to ban?

 

[OldLady]

We need both.

Again, why the AR platform? What specifically does the AR platform provide that other platforms do not?

This is a hard question, because to really get the result you want (presumably guns that can kill lots of people in a short amount of time) more than 75% of civilian guns will be included in such a ban.

That's why the Assault Weapons Bann in 1994(?) was such a joke. All it did was turn this:

into this:

Purely cosmetic. It did absolutely nothing to change the effectiveness of the weapon.

This is why we need the left to be more educated before they try to shove gun control down our throats. We have already given up a bunch of freedoms to gun control, and yet we still have gun violence.

You can understand why we are apprehensive about giving in. Surely, you can see why we suspect the motives of those calling for gun control, can't you?

You would like me to be more educated but it's hard to get an answer to my questions when I ask. I would truly like to know what makes the AR the weapon of choice for mass shooters. I have heard it's just the cool gun of the month, and that it is easily customizable (but I didn't learn what customizations a mass shooter might want that an AR can provide).

The ten year assault weapons ban held mass shootings steady instead of annually rising as they had been, and when the ban expired, mass shootings increased 200% the following year. So it may have been a total coincidence, but I wonder if it was actually a worthless, cosmetic piece of fluff.

I have already said here that I am trying to find out more about this AR weapon. So why are you expecting me to answer questions on them?
I asked first. LOL

 

[cnm]

Why Colt decided to make a civilian knock off and market it to the public is beyond me. They should be shot for it.

There was a lull in US wars, so they decided freedom and liberty began at home.