Rustic
Diamond Member
- Oct 3, 2015
- 58,769
- 5,895
- 1,940
- Banned
- #421
Well, if you knew anything other than the bleeding heart media has told ya.i cannot tell the difference from that photo. The bottom gun, the black one, has a visible safety, but it does not designate a firing system. If we were debating automobile safety features, would knowledge of torque ratio be pertainent? Would you be disqualified from the debate out of hand for not knowing engine displacement?You still have not answered my question??The legislation fell right where the congressmen, bought and paid for by the NRA, decided that grips and stocks and flash suppressors and other cosmetic distinctions were what made a particular gun more lethal, more dangerous, more capable of really racking up a stunning body count. They were useful idiots to assure nothing would work in the minds of those drinking the NRA kool-aide.He means that no one is about to be bamboozelded by the cosmetics argument from the gun lobby again. The assault weapons ban of 1996 was lead down a primrose path with arguments over detachable stocks, flash suppressors and grip styles. The firing mechanism and the round capacity including ammunition magazines are the point.What do you mean??
No...you are wrong...the "assault" weapon ban in 1996 was another feel good, really stupid gun law that did nothing to stop violent criminals or mass shooters from getting guns and when it ended nothing changed either way....it was a huge, waste of time that accomplished nothing and was just plain stupid........
France has an assault weapon ban...a real one...their people cannot own military weapons or fully automatic weapons....and every criminal or terrorist who wants one has absolutely no problem getting them....
See...the French went farther down the path of stupidity and it didn't help them either....
Consider yourself educated in reality.....
The guns used in Paris, semi-automatic firing systems and large capacity magazines, were brought in from Belgium. Just as the guns on the streets of D.C. are brought in from outside.
Your's is a cheap trick. Cosmetics is what derailed the Assault Weapons legislation of 1996. Such tactics are just a way of deflecting and ignoring the greater issue.
You would know the bottom one is nothing more than a 500$ sporting/hunting rifle really no different than grand pappys "hunt'n gun" a .223 caliber varmint rifle with nothing more than simple cosmetics. It would never pass for in theater use.
Just The barrel and silencer adapter on the top one are worth over twice as much as the whole bottom set up.
The top one is at least military grade and then some, 6.8 spc and fully auto...
Last edited: