What is an "assault rifle"?

Yes, part of the design intent of Assault Rifles is the ability to "kill many really fast", apparently military types prefer them that way.
Personally though, if I wanted to take out a bunches of civilians at close quarters quickly I'd go with a couple of plain ole sawed-off shotguns, more devastating at close quarters and far easier to maneuver.
The NEW 'weapon of choice' of mass shooters:

Standard-Mfg-DP12-2-4x4.png

Just watched a video of that! That thing is bad ass.

The flaming watermelons was pretty kick ass too!

 
It’s an inaccurate term used to describe a semi automatic rifle in order to get an emotional response after a mass shooting.

That type of hyperbole is strictly allowed from both sides in the US Court of Public Opinion.
Are saying the term assault rifle is not another way of describing a semi automatic rifle and it does not evoke a more emotional response than semi automatic? If not then why not simply call the rifle a semi automatic?


I'm simply saying that the issue is being tried in the court of public opinion via the press, and both side are compelled to employ that tried a true practice.
 
Assault rifle - Wikipedia

An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

Selective fire means the capability of a weapon to be adjusted to fire in semi-automatic, burst mode, and/or fully automatic firing mode.


We can't get assault rifles as civilians.

.


yes we can,,,
Practically speaking, no we can't.

.


reality speaking yes we can,,,,
At a reasonable cost, no we can't

.


reasonable cost is a matter of perspective,,,yes we can,,,
If we have to ask permission from the government, then NO, we cannot.
 
It’s an inaccurate term used to describe a semi automatic rifle in order to get an emotional response after a mass shooting.

That type of hyperbole is strictly allowed from both sides in the US Court of Public Opinion.
Are saying the term assault rifle is not another way of describing a semi automatic rifle and it does not evoke a more emotional response than semi automatic? If not then why not simply call the rifle a semi automatic?


I'm simply saying that the issue is being tried in the court of public opinion via the press, and both side are compelled to employ that tried a true practice.
You use the term hyperbole is it hyperbole if it’s true? The overwhelming majority of gun violence and deaths come from handguns which are also semi automatic yet no one calls them assault pistols. I find it interesting that the assault weapon or rifle label is only applied to one type of weapon.
 
It’s an inaccurate term used to describe a semi automatic rifle in order to get an emotional response after a mass shooting.

That type of hyperbole is strictly allowed from both sides in the US Court of Public Opinion.
Are saying the term assault rifle is not another way of describing a semi automatic rifle and it does not evoke a more emotional response than semi automatic? If not then why not simply call the rifle a semi automatic?


I'm simply saying that the issue is being tried in the court of public opinion via the press, and both side are compelled to employ that tried a true practice.
You use the term hyperbole is it hyperbole if it’s true? The overwhelming majority of gun violence and deaths come from handguns which are also semi automatic yet no one calls them assault pistols. I find it interesting that the assault weapon or rifle label is only applied to one type of weapon.
I agree with you. There is ZERO "need" for any type of semi-auto magazine fed weapon
 
I agree with you. There is ZERO "need" for any type of semi-auto magazine fed weapon
Fortunately, your subjective and bigoted perception of need does not in any way translate to a sound argument for limiting the rights of the law abiding.
Those rights are already limited. You can't buy a machine gun made after 1986 and you face major hurdles in buying one made prior.

Banning semi-auto magazine fed weapons has the same logic and the same laws to base it on.

Machine guns are too dangerous to be in the hands of civilians. The same goes for assault weapons and in fact magazine fed semi-auto of any sort
 
I agree with you. There is ZERO "need" for any type of semi-auto magazine fed weapon
Fortunately, your subjective and bigoted perception of need does not in any way translate to a sound argument for limiting the rights of the law abiding.
Those rights are already limited. You can't buy a machine gun made after 1986 and you face major hurdles in buying one made prior.
Banning semi-auto magazine fed weapons has the same logic and the same laws to base it on.
You cannot show this to be true.
 
yes we can,,,
Practically speaking, no we can't.

.


reality speaking yes we can,,,,
At a reasonable cost, no we can't

.


reasonable cost is a matter of perspective,,,yes we can,,,
If we have to ask permission from the government, then NO, we cannot.


thats not correct,,,

it just means its infringed and unconstitutional,,,
 
67 percent of Americans support an assault weapons ban
Among Republicans, 46 percent support, 46 percent approve

A stunning number lands in the middle of the gun debate - CNNPolitics

Among Republican women -- one of the key swing voting blocs heading into 2020, a majority (54%) support an assault weapons ban, while just 36% oppose it. And even a majority of people in gun-owning households (53%) support an assault weapons ban.
 
Assault rifle - Wikipedia

An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.

Selective fire means the capability of a weapon to be adjusted to fire in semi-automatic, burst mode, and/or fully automatic firing mode.


We can't get assault rifles as civilians.

.


yes we can,,,

You can't just walk in and buy a full auto. They quit making them in 1986.


walk in where???

most big gun shops carry full auto and are more than happy to sell them to you,,,and help you get the process started,,,
 

Forum List

Back
Top