Honest debate: Libs...would the "AR15-pistol" w 10 Rd mag still be an "Assault Weapon"

[Brain357]

...shall not be infringed.... Look it up what it means...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Read it again. The operative part of the sentence is A Well Regulated Militia. This has nothing to do with hunting or home defense, it is about weapons to be used if a Federal Government becomes tirynacle or excessively oppressive. The Government has the right to remove certain classes of weapons from the unlicensed public. Remember the Thompson Machine Gun? That puppy sold in guns shows, gun shops and even street corners. They regulated it so that you needed a Firearms License to buy, own and store it. It was the original Assault Rifle. And it was the original civilian mass murder weapon of choice in the 1920s. It wasn't until the 1960s that it was under question. Before that, it was understood that military grade weapons were allowed by State Sponsored Militias but if a private citizen wanted one, they need the lowest for of Firearms License. The Founding Fathers really knew what they were doing when they wrote the 2 amendment. It's one thought, not two.

Wow, how many times we have to go through this. Read below:

From the founding of the country to 1934 the Second Amendment was understood by the populace and the Courts as it was intended to be by architects of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The National Firearms Act changed that in order to "fight" gang wars during the Prohibition era. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" means that the people have the right to own contemporary weapons. Illustrated below:

"On May 8, 1792, Congress passed "[a]n act more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States" requiring:

[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia...[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.[117]"
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Armed citizenry is supposed to be the militia.

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Mag capacity doesn't matter right? So what difference does it make? And well getting caught with a high cap mag and being thrown in jail before killing is a win.

 

[HappyJoy]

...shall not be infringed.... Look it up what it means...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Read it again. The operative part of the sentence is A Well Regulated Militia. This has nothing to do with hunting or home defense, it is about weapons to be used if a Federal Government becomes tirynacle or excessively oppressive. The Government has the right to remove certain classes of weapons from the unlicensed public. Remember the Thompson Machine Gun? That puppy sold in guns shows, gun shops and even street corners. They regulated it so that you needed a Firearms License to buy, own and store it. It was the original Assault Rifle. And it was the original civilian mass murder weapon of choice in the 1920s. It wasn't until the 1960s that it was under question. Before that, it was understood that military grade weapons were allowed by State Sponsored Militias but if a private citizen wanted one, they need the lowest for of Firearms License. The Founding Fathers really knew what they were doing when they wrote the 2 amendment. It's one thought, not two.

Wow, how many times we have to go through this. Read below:

From the founding of the country to 1934 the Second Amendment was understood by the populace and the Courts as it was intended to be by architects of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The National Firearms Act changed that in order to "fight" gang wars during the Prohibition era. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" means that the people have the right to own contemporary weapons. Illustrated below:

"On May 8, 1792, Congress passed "[a]n act more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States" requiring:

[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia...[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.[117]"
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Armed citizenry is supposed to be the militia.

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Way to not get the point.

 

[defcon4]

Make jokes, it's not 1934 anymore. You can long for making America great again ala Trump, 1934 isn't where we want to be.

Keep trolling....

 

[HappyJoy]

Make jokes, it's not 1934 anymore. You can long for making America great again ala Trump, 1934 isn't where we want to be.

Keep trolling....

Clearly I'm not trolling. It's you guys who have provided zero evidence to your case.

 

[Chuz Life]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Read it again. The operative part of the sentence is A Well Regulated Militia. This has nothing to do with hunting or home defense, it is about weapons to be used if a Federal Government becomes tirynacle or excessively oppressive. The Government has the right to remove certain classes of weapons from the unlicensed public. Remember the Thompson Machine Gun? That puppy sold in guns shows, gun shops and even street corners. They regulated it so that you needed a Firearms License to buy, own and store it. It was the original Assault Rifle. And it was the original civilian mass murder weapon of choice in the 1920s. It wasn't until the 1960s that it was under question. Before that, it was understood that military grade weapons were allowed by State Sponsored Militias but if a private citizen wanted one, they need the lowest for of Firearms License. The Founding Fathers really knew what they were doing when they wrote the 2 amendment. It's one thought, not two.

Wow, how many times we have to go through this. Read below:

From the founding of the country to 1934 the Second Amendment was understood by the populace and the Courts as it was intended to be by architects of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The National Firearms Act changed that in order to "fight" gang wars during the Prohibition era. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" means that the people have the right to own contemporary weapons. Illustrated below:

"On May 8, 1792, Congress passed "[a]n act more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States" requiring:

[E]ach and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia...[and] every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.[117]"
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Armed citizenry is supposed to be the militia.

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Mag capacity doesn't matter right? So what difference does it make? And well getting caught with a high cap mag and being thrown in jail before killing is a win.

Damn. . . why didn't you say so?

So, the threat of going to jail will keep CRIMINALS from having these high capacity mags!?!

That's Brilliant!


Do tell us why does that deterrence only work for high capacity mags and not for rapes, murders, robberies, assaults, stabbings, drug crimes or car thefts?

 

[Brain357]

Wow, how many times we have to go through this. Read below:

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Mag capacity doesn't matter right? So what difference does it make? And well getting caught with a high cap mag and being thrown in jail before killing is a win.

Damn. . . why didn't you say so?

So, the threat of going to jail will keep CRIMINALS from having these high capacity mags!?!

That's Brilliant!


Do tell us why does that deterrence only work for high capacity mags and not for rapes, murders, robberies, assaults, stabbings, drug crimes or car thefts?

Another reason to catch them before they kill. You prefer after they have killed?

 

[bucs90]

Don't you think it makes sense to set a reasonable limit to fire rate and ammo capacity? Isn't that just common sense?

What should fire rate be??? How about equal to a revolver? Is that fair?

 

[bucs90]

So....what I'm seeing in a pretty fair debate here is the anti gun crowd says rate of fire and magazine capacity are what dictates assault weapon.

Well...an AR has the same rate of fire as an old revolver. 1 trigger pull = 1 shot. It doesn't shoot any faster than that. Full auto??? Rare and excessively expensive. Those aren't really in this debate.

So....its down to magazine capacity.

If I have a 15 round mag (standard police) as opposed to a 30....what difference does it make? I can change a mag in under 2 seconds on a good day. No more than 4 seconds ever.



So....all this legislation is to create a 4 second gap...at best...in the shooting???

Really?? Thats not gonna change shit. VA Tech killed 33 with a pistol and changed mags.


I truly think this is just symbolic. The AR15 symbolizes American gun rights better than any weapon in history....and the anti simply WANTS it.

If that wasn't it....then it's really all just about a 2 to 4 second pause to change mags???? Really?

 

[Brain357]

So....what I'm seeing in a pretty fair debate here is the anti gun crowd says rate of fire and magazine capacity are what dictates assault weapon.

Well...an AR has the same rate of fire as an old revolver. 1 trigger pull = 1 shot. It doesn't shoot any faster than that. Full auto??? Rare and excessively expensive. Those aren't really in this debate.

So....its down to magazine capacity.

If I have a 15 round mag (standard police) as opposed to a 30....what difference does it make? I can change a mag in under 2 seconds on a good day. No more than 4 seconds ever.



So....all this legislation is to create a 4 second gap...at best...in the shooting???

Really?? Thats not gonna change shit. VA Tech killed 33 with a pistol and changed mags.


I truly think this is just symbolic. The AR15 symbolizes American gun rights better than any weapon in history....and the anti simply WANTS it.

If that wasn't it....then it's really all just about a 2 to 4 second pause to change mags???? Really?

Actually even in a very controlled target shooting practice it is often far longer than that. Throw in a high stress situation and well it is going to happen much more often. I've provided many examples. Try to stay honest...

 

[Brain357]

In real events shooters have been stopped at reload:
Loughner proceeded to fire apparently randomly at other members of the crowd.[1][21] He reportedly used a 9×19mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol with a 33-round magazine.[22][23] A nearby store employee said he heard "15 to 20 gunshots".[24] Loughner stopped to reload, but dropped the loaded magazine from his pocket to the sidewalk, from where bystander Patricia Maisch grabbed it.[25] Another bystander clubbed the back of the assailant's head with a folding chair, injuring his elbow in the process, representing the fourteenth injury.[26] Loughner was tackled to the ground by Bill Badger, a 74-year-old retired United States Army Colonel [27] who had also been shot himself. Loughner was further subdued by Maisch and bystanders Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio. Zamudio, a concealed weapon (CCW) permit holder, had a weapon on his person, but arrived after the shooting had stopped and did not draw his firearm.[28] Thirty-one shell casings were found at the scene by investigators.[29]

 

[tyroneweaver]

I am of the opinion that all weapons are "ASSAULT" weapons. Any weapon can be used for an assault.

Even many objects not designed to be weapons can be still used as weapons.

=> Ban everything!

.......... *Goes to hide her Assault Pillow*

Hold it tight to your head.

How about if we just agree to keep people from the terrorist watch list from getting one?

And yet you guys object to the RW assaults on Hillary's emails without due process.

 

[tyroneweaver]

In real events shooters have been stopped at reload:
Loughner proceeded to fire apparently randomly at other members of the crowd.[1][21] He reportedly used a 9×19mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol with a 33-round magazine.[22][23] A nearby store employee said he heard "15 to 20 gunshots".[24] Loughner stopped to reload, but dropped the loaded magazine from his pocket to the sidewalk, from where bystander Patricia Maisch grabbed it.[25] Another bystander clubbed the back of the assailant's head with a folding chair, injuring his elbow in the process, representing the fourteenth injury.[26] Loughner was tackled to the ground by Bill Badger, a 74-year-old retired United States Army Colonel [27] who had also been shot himself. Loughner was further subdued by Maisch and bystanders Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio. Zamudio, a concealed weapon (CCW) permit holder, had a weapon on his person, but arrived after the shooting had stopped and did not draw his firearm.[28] Thirty-one shell casings were found at the scene by investigators.[29]

my 5.7x28 FNL pistol holds 30 rnds

 

[Slade3200]

Wow, how many times we have to go through this. Read below:

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Mag capacity doesn't matter right? So what difference does it make? And well getting caught with a high cap mag and being thrown in jail before killing is a win.

Damn. . . why didn't you say so?

So, the threat of going to jail will keep CRIMINALS from having these high capacity mags!?!

That's Brilliant!


Do tell us why does that deterrence only work for high capacity mags and not for rapes, murders, robberies, assaults, stabbings, drug crimes or car thefts?

What's your solution smart guy?

 

[Slade3200]

Don't you think it makes sense to set a reasonable limit to fire rate and ammo capacity? Isn't that just common sense?

What should fire rate be??? How about equal to a revolver? Is that fair?

Sure that's fair, that's the debate that should be had. Set up reasonable standards. Tighten the screws with what we can control in the legal market and then develop strategies to combat the OTHER problem which is the illegal market

 

[HappyJoy]

It's not 1934, there are limits to the 2nd amendment.

You stopped reading at 1934.
Well, that was the year when gun grabbing started in earnest under whom? FDR the New Deal guy. Read the whole thing to have an understanding about the Second Amendment.

From that, it's clear that you know (or should know) that it is no more realistic to expect criminals to abide by laws regulating magazine capacity than it is for them to respect laws against making meth.

Mag capacity doesn't matter right? So what difference does it make? And well getting caught with a high cap mag and being thrown in jail before killing is a win.

Damn. . . why didn't you say so?

So, the threat of going to jail will keep CRIMINALS from having these high capacity mags!?!

That's Brilliant!


Do tell us why does that deterrence only work for high capacity mags and not for rapes, murders, robberies, assaults, stabbings, drug crimes or car thefts?

What's your solution smart guy?

His solution is BAU.

 

[Bassman007]

They should be able to intelligently tell me if the AR-15 Pistol is still an "Assault Weapon"....though....in fairness...I bet most of them didn't even know such a gun existed. AR-15 Pistol??? It's not an oxymoron.

There are no assault weapons available to the general public, no matter how dangerous they mitght look. All semi auto's shoot only one round at a time.

 

[Brain357]

They should be able to intelligently tell me if the AR-15 Pistol is still an "Assault Weapon"....though....in fairness...I bet most of them didn't even know such a gun existed. AR-15 Pistol??? It's not an oxymoron.

There are no assault weapons available to the general public, no matter how dangerous they mitght look. All semi auto's shoot only one round at a time.

What do you call a gun that can kill 49 and injure over 50 in minutes? Mass killing gun?

 

[Bassman007]

They should be able to intelligently tell me if the AR-15 Pistol is still an "Assault Weapon"....though....in fairness...I bet most of them didn't even know such a gun existed. AR-15 Pistol??? It's not an oxymoron.

There are no assault weapons available to the general public, no matter how dangerous they mitght look. All semi auto's shoot only one round at a time.

What do you call a gun that can kill 49 and injure over 50 in minutes? Mass killing gun?

The gun Mateen used shoots no faster than any other semi auto. That said how many semi auto's and full auto's have you shot? Do you even know what semi auto means? If the gun he used is banned, then all rifles have to be banned, and if they are not available then shotguns will be used so they have to be banned as well, then the perfect design of the founding fathers is scrapped.

Go ahead Google what semi auto means...............fool

 

[Slade3200]

They should be able to intelligently tell me if the AR-15 Pistol is still an "Assault Weapon"....though....in fairness...I bet most of them didn't even know such a gun existed. AR-15 Pistol??? It's not an oxymoron.

There are no assault weapons available to the general public, no matter how dangerous they mitght look. All semi auto's shoot only one round at a time.

What do you call a gun that can kill 49 and injure over 50 in minutes? Mass killing gun?

No point for weapons like that to be out there... Take 10 shots with 10 trigger pulls and reload. That or so thing close to that is enough to hunt, sport or protect yourself... There is no reason for average citizen to easily be able to own something more powerful. Create special licenses for higher powered weapons for those that can show they Can handle the responsibility, fine, but don't sell to Joe blow nutball at Walmart.

Use your brains

 

[Brain357]

They should be able to intelligently tell me if the AR-15 Pistol is still an "Assault Weapon"....though....in fairness...I bet most of them didn't even know such a gun existed. AR-15 Pistol??? It's not an oxymoron.

There are no assault weapons available to the general public, no matter how dangerous they mitght look. All semi auto's shoot only one round at a time.

What do you call a gun that can kill 49 and injure over 50 in minutes? Mass killing gun?

The gun Mateen used shoots no faster than any other semi auto. That said how many semi auto's and full auto's have you shot? Do you even know what semi auto means? If the gun he used is banned, then all rifles have to be banned, and if they are not available then shotguns will be used so they have to be banned as well, then the perfect design of the founding fathers is scrapped.

I own and have shot many guns. What do you call a gun that killed 49 and injured over 50 in minutes? Only mass killer need high capacity magazines. Stop arming them so well.