Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just because it's a law doesn't make it right.
This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.
If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?
Just because it's a law doesn't make it right.
This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.
If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?
The definition of "Assault Rifle" is not in question.
Why would you present the definition for "Assault Rifle" as that of "Assault Weapon"?
Isn't it best if pro-rights people maintain the factually correct position that the guns that were assigned the invented label of "Assault Weapons" under the 1994 law ARE NOT select fire "Assault Rifles"?
Is there any particular reason you are engaged in advancing the anti-rights side's disinformation campaign?
I don't know how many times I have too tell you this, but just because something looks like an assault weapon does not make it one.
It actually has to function like one.
Hello......McFly?????
I also don't know how many times I have to tell you this:
The discussion in this thread is centered around a potential assault weapons ban. An assault weapon is defined under the law in the previous Federal ban as well as in some existing state bans. In regard to an assault weapons ban it really doesn't matter what you think is or isn't an assault weapon. What matters is how an assault weapon is defined under the law. There is nothing at all about selective fire or full auto function in the definition of an assault weapon under the law.
This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.
If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?
Why won't the democrats test it? If they really believe that the majority of Americans support gun control, just campaign on the issue of gun control.
Bans against most "assualt weapons" are simply unconstitutional. End of story. Enjoy them until the courts get around to striking them down.
Bans against most "assualt weapons" are simply unconstitutional. End of story. Enjoy them until the courts get around to striking them down.
but you think all Muslims are murderers, so what you think means what again?
Bans against most "assualt weapons" are simply unconstitutional. End of story. Enjoy them until the courts get around to striking them down.
but you think all Muslims are murderers, so what you think means what again?
I have as much right to an opinion as do you and I could care less what your's is.
Contrary to what the deranged NRA fanatics on this messageboard have to say, the VAST MAJORITY of Americans favor tougher gun control laws --
A 2011 New York Times/CBS News poll found that 63 percent of Americans favor a ban on high-capacity magazines; just as many supported an assault-weapons ban.
According to the poll, even a majority of gun-owning households favor a ban on assault weapons, although by a smaller margin. 54% of them favor it, and 44% oppose --
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Jan11_Econ.pdf
Also in 2011, a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 83 percent supported financing a system in which people treated for mental illness would be reported to a federal gun registry database to prevent them from buying guns; 71 percent favored this for those treated for drug abuse.
http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1120a1 Guns and Discourse.pdf
So let me simplify this poll data for you uninformed, unsophisticated NRA simpletons -- most Americans are on MY SIDE, not yours.
All of your right-wing nutjob spinning and excuse-making isn't going to change that fact.
I am laughing so loud, I popped a obamaroid. Your sources suck. Also, they are wrong.Contrary to what the deranged NRA fanatics on this messageboard have to say, the VAST MAJORITY of Americans favor tougher gun control laws --
A 2011 New York Times/CBS News poll found that 63 percent of Americans favor a ban on high-capacity magazines; just as many supported an assault-weapons ban.
According to the poll, even a majority of gun-owning households favor a ban on assault weapons, although by a smaller margin. 54% of them favor it, and 44% oppose --
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Jan11_Econ.pdf
Also in 2011, a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 83 percent supported financing a system in which people treated for mental illness would be reported to a federal gun registry database to prevent them from buying guns; 71 percent favored this for those treated for drug abuse.
http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1120a1 Guns and Discourse.pdf
So let me simplify this poll data for you uninformed, unsophisticated NRA simpletons -- most Americans are on MY SIDE, not yours.
All of your right-wing nutjob spinning and excuse-making isn't going to change that fact.
in a word, perhaps you could say, that the shootings resulted, from a "failure of (building) security" -- not due to any inadequacies of gun laws. Perhaps theaters could incentivize security, offering free ticket (or refunds) to anybody catching doors open; and perhaps the film runners in the upstairs back film rooms could be told to, and announce to movie goers, that they will stop movies, and raise the lights, if they see doors left open. A general level of wariness would not be burdensome, and could (evidently) save lives.presumably others have observed, that the proximate cause, of the Batman shootings, was the shooter propping open an emergency exit, for perhaps 10 minutes, whilst he retrieved his guns, and donned his armor. Failure to control entrances & exits allowed him to saunter back in, at his leisure, and begin shooting. . . .
Absolutely correct and unless someone wants to argue that the theater shooter needed a bayonet lug, flash suppressor or grenade launcher to commit his crime he would have been able to purchase the weapon he used even if the 1994 law was in effect now . . . And that goes for the drum mag too.
Then stop just talking shit on the internet, you sissy bedwetter.Why won't the democrats test it? If they really believe that the majority of Americans support gun control, just campaign on the issue of gun control.
Most Americans are confused by the garbage the NRA puts out about gunz, so it might be hard to do.
Remember, when it comes to fooling the people and tricking them into voting against their own interests, that is the very definition of the con party, remember the election where they figured out they could get people to the polls if they put up phony gay marriage issues?
It really is a crime against humanity to be a republiklan or shitbagger...just sayin
You could take it to court and you should win, using Lewis vs US and Miller vs US as precedenceHello......McFly?????
I also don't know how many times I have to tell you this:
The discussion in this thread is centered around a potential assault weapons ban. An assault weapon is defined under the law in the previous Federal ban as well as in some existing state bans. In regard to an assault weapons ban it really doesn't matter what you think is or isn't an assault weapon. What matters is how an assault weapon is defined under the law. There is nothing at all about selective fire or full auto function in the definition of an assault weapon under the law.
This is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.
If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?
We have a permanent assault weapons ban here in Mass. It mirrors the 1994 Federal ban. If a police officer catches me with an assault weapon how do you suppose it will go if I tell him the law is wrong on how it defines an assault weapon? If the feds ban assault weapons again will it matter what you think an assault weapon is or how the law defines it?
If private-sector regulation would help diffuse tensions, then perhaps the NRA could establish a "gun check hotline". Registered members could call the hotline, whenever they took their guns to the range, out shooting, or out hunting? Such might make a prominent show, of gun owners exercising thought, caution, and care, in handling their guns; and that they were not actually lugging them around, under their trench coats, every where, and all the time. (Is that the public fear??)
You could take it to court and you should win, using Lewis vs US and Miller vs US as precedenceThis is what an assault weapon use to be
assault rifle 
noun
1.
a military rifle capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge.
Until some anti gun nutcase got it into their mind to push an agenda now it's this.
2.
a nonmilitary weapon modeled on the military assault rifle, usually modified to allow only semiautomatic fire.
If the neo assault weapons are so effective why doesn't the military use them?
We have a permanent assault weapons ban here in Mass. It mirrors the 1994 Federal ban. If a police officer catches me with an assault weapon how do you suppose it will go if I tell him the law is wrong on how it defines an assault weapon? If the feds ban assault weapons again will it matter what you think an assault weapon is or how the law defines it?
To be factually correct on what an assault weapon is you have to drop the anti gun definition of assault weapons.
If what you call an assault weapons is a true assault weapon why doesn't the military use them?
