Assault rifle ban will fail without objective definitions because...

What is the goal of all GCA's, thanks for admitting that.

 

Sorry you have reading comprehension issues. The goal is to ban assault rifles. My statement was only making fun of peopke who don't think they are different from all semi automatic rifles.

 

The fact that they underestimated the insanity of Bundy and his followers has nothing to do with the silly notion that you are going to withstand a full assault with a few pathetic semi automatic rifles. Same idiocy that can pretend having guns in civilian hands is going to prevent a full attempt at racism or Communism or Trumpism or any ism supported by the US military.

 

Sorry you have reading comprehension issues.

Other than the way they look, so called assault rifles are the same as any other semi-automatic rifle, that is to say they fire a single round with each pull of the trigger and nothing more than that.

But I guess you lack the knowledge about them to understand that and think they are something that they are not.

It might be time to do some research before making any more such false claims about them.

 

Thanks for destroying your own Assault Rifle claim, finally the truth has been spoken.

 

It is not a belief, but rather a fact. There is no meaningful difference, read none whatsoever, between a so-called "assault weapon" and any other commonly available firearm that is on the private market.

However such is not a legitimate ground for attempting a prohibition on all semi-automatic firearms. Considering how old and well-established the technology really is, dating back to the nineteenth century, there is no legitimate reason for attempting a prohibition on them now. Such should have been done when the technology first came into existence when it was rare, not today when it is not common place and subject to widespread ownership for lawful purposes.

The united state supreme court has already held in Heller that such an attempt is unconstitutional.

 

Which assault rifle claim was that? Are you just making things up again?

 

I don't think the assault rifle supporters on this forum know what they are talking about. Here is the NRA definition of an assault rifle

• Assault Rifle
  By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.
  

 

And once again you have destroyed your own argument.

The so called Assault Rifles which is what you are requesting to be banned are semi-automatic rifles which are incapable of selective fire.

Selective fire rifles are NFA, requiring BATF permission to purchase, after paying a fee and waiting around 6 months to obtain that permission and are sold at a price in the tens of thousands of dollars.

 

And here is a definition of an assault weapon

Senate Bill 23 Assault Weapon Characteristics

1. Home
   
2. Firearms
   
3. Regulations
   
4. Senate Bill 23 Assault Weapon Characteristics

Effective January 1, 2000, Senate Bill 23, Statutes of 1999, establishes new criteria for defining assault weapons based on generic characteristics. This bill allows and requires persons who own/possess firearms that fall under the new "assault weapon" definition to register those firearms with the Department of Justice during the one-year period between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2000. Effective January 1, 2000, this bill adds Penal Code Section 12276.1 to the Penal Code as follows.

• 12276.1 (a) Notwithstanding Section 12276, "assault weapon" shall also mean any of the following:
  1. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
     1. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon.
     2. A thumbhole stock.
     3. A folding or telescoping stock.
     4. A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
     5. A flash suppressor.
     6. A forward pistol grip.
  2. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
  3. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.
  4. A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
     1. A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
     2. (B) A second handgrip.
     3. A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning his or her hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
     4. The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
  5. A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
  6. A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:
     1. A folding or telescoping stock.
     2. A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock, or vertical handgrip.
  7. A semiautomatic shotgun that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine.
  8. Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
     1. "Assault weapon" does not include any antique firearm.
     2. The following definitions shall apply under this section:
        1. "Magazine" shall mean any ammunition feeding device.
        2. "Capacity to accept more than 10 rounds" shall mean capable of accommodating more than 10 rounds, but shall not be construed to include a feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than 10 rounds.
        3. "Antique firearm" means any firearm manufactured prior to January 1, 1899.
  9. This section shall become operative January 1, 2000.

 

I believe this is a quote from your post which will confirm your confusion. Post number 205 To be exact. I think your ignorance as to the difference between assault rifles and semi- automatic rifles has been adequately demonstrated. Or maybe you are just confused by the difference between assault rifles and assault weapons. Or perhaps just generally confused.


" Other than the way they look, so called assault rifles are the same as any other semi-automatic rifle, that is to say they fire a single round with each pull of the trigger and nothing more than that."

 

No based on you posts you have clearly displayed you ignorance of the subject, there is nothing I need to add.

Other than loaning you a larger shovel to dig the hole you are in deeper.

 

I’m confused. Are assault weapons overly powerful and dangerous killing machines or are they pathetic useless tools of no value in insurrection? Seems they vacillate wildly between two extremes. Makes my head spin.

 

A so called assault weapon is just a regular gun. My little lever action .30-30 hunting rifle is more powerful than the .223 round AR’s fire. Sure, an AR can fire faster, but unless you take the same amount of time to apply the fundamentals of marksmanship that it takes to fire my lever action rifle, you will not hit a damn thing. It’s not like playing call of duty.

 

The Constitution says otherwise.

On the contrary, it is highly relevant.

The right to keep and bear arms is not simply about the militia (although it does cover that). It also covers private self defense.

Self defense remains a solid reason for people to be armed.

The historical context of the Second Amendment is that it protects the right to keep and bear arms, which includes private self defense.

So what? We still have the right to have weapons that are suitable for self defense.

We also still have the right to have all weapons for which there is no justification for banning.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms still exists. And the people still have the right to use those arms for private self defense.

You have not been not talking about assault weapons at all. You've been talking about ordinary semi-auto guns.

That was a ban on some ordinary semi-auto guns, not a ban on assault rifles.

The fact that it randomly banned some ordinary semi-auto guns and not other ordinary semi-auto guns is hardly a sign of success.

No innocent people are slaughtered because an ordinary semi-auto gun has a pistol grip on it.

If your goal is to ban assault rifles, why are you are focusing entirely on weapons that are not assault rifles?

That's a good definition. Note that it says that it is incorrect to apply this term to semi-auto weapons.

This definition is fraudulent. It deals entirely with guns that are not assault weapons.

 

Well regulated means their weapons and kit are well maintained. That’s what well regulated meant in their day.

How do you figure there is no reason for it today?? The whole reason it exists is to keep the government from becoming tyrannical. The founding fathers recognized that the final, ultimate power to enforce the constitution and to keep us a free nation had to be an armed populace that could keep the government in check through hard power. The people dictate to the government, not the other way around.

 

The concept that civilians with semi-automatics are going to stand against the US military should the government go rogue is absurd.

 

For your education as to the meaning of “ well regulated”. Hint it didn’t mean Well maintained.

https://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

 

Is it simply not possible for yourself to comprehend that the phrase "assault weapon" is not the same thing as "assault rifle" and the two terms mean entirely different things?

 

So if you think the Constitution supports a universal right to own arms I guess according to you convicted criminals are allowed, and people with mental health problems are allowed. An interesting opinion.

 

Since I posted the NRA definition I guess I do as compared to most posters who obviously have no clue. And you will note it is possible as I posted to define “ assault weapon”

 

From the citation presented on the part of yourself:

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

Pray tell, how does "in proper working order" not directly amount to being well maintained? How does "functioning as expected" not directly amount to being well maintained? Explain such.

 

Glad to note that you cannot argue that your post displays the confusion you so desperately try to blame on others.

 

And the NRA itself stated the term does not apply to semi-automatic firearms. Therefore firearms such as the AR-15, and any other type of rifle currently available on the private market, does not meet the definition of being an assault rifle.