Educational tool on what an assault weapons is.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Ingenemployee (2307 posts) -

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

Found this and thought it would be a great tool for those who dont quite understand what an assault rifle really is.

#2 Posted by Nuck81 (5820 posts) -

I'm not looking at that. Another Rick Roll for sure

#3 Posted by jimkabrhel (15417 posts) -
There have been assault weapon/rifle threads recently for me to get a much better idea than I had.
#4 Posted by Ingenemployee (2307 posts) -

I'm not looking at that. Another Rick Roll for sure

Nuck81

Its not, I assure you.

#5 Posted by Ingenemployee (2307 posts) -

There have been assault weapon/rifle threads recently for me to get a much better idea than I had.jimkabrhel

Yeah I wasent sure weather to post another gun thread or not, but I think this website could be very helpful.

#6 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Good find. Some of the articles I had no idea even existed.

#7 Posted by dave123321 (33625 posts) -
There have been assault weapon/rifle threads recently for me to get a much better idea than I had.jimkabrhel
#8 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -
Does it matter, the point remains that guns should be banned. Look at murder rate in the USA compared to far more developed and intellectual nations.
#9 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Does it matter, the point remains that guns should be banned. Look at murder rate in the USA compared to far more developed and intellectual nations.HarIeyQuinn

It does matter. We don't punish the many for the actions of the few. No civilized country does that.

#10 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]Does it matter, the point remains that guns should be banned. Look at murder rate in the USA compared to far more developed and intellectual nations.airshocker

It does matter. We don't punish the many for the actions of the few. No civilized country does that.

By that logic, noone should obey traffic laws just because there are some wrecks.
#11 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

By that logic, noone should obey traffic laws just because there are some wrecks.HarIeyQuinn

No, by that logic we shouldn't ban cars because there are some idiots who drive drunk.

#12 Posted by dave123321 (33625 posts) -
Have a feeling HQ is air.
#13 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]By that logic, noone should obey traffic laws just because there are some wrecks.airshocker

No, by that logic we shouldn't ban cars because there are some idiots who drive drunk.

Not really. How many children must die so that you can fulfill your useless obsession to own big assault rifles? Cars have use for everyone.
#14 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Not really. How many children must die so that you can fulfill your useless obsession to own big assault rifles? Cars have use for everyone.HarIeyQuinn

I don't own an assault rifle. I own a sporting rifle.

If you're going to be purposefully facetious in an attempt to drum up some sort of outrage, I have no reason to discuss anything withj you.

And yet some people choose not to own or even use a car. The same with guns. Just because you have no use for one doesn't mean that isn't the case for everyone else.

#15 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Have a feeling HQ is air.dave123321

Nonsense. I hate Harley Quinn.

#16 Posted by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -
[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]By that logic, noone should obey traffic laws just because there are some wrecks.HarIeyQuinn

No, by that logic we shouldn't ban cars because there are some idiots who drive drunk.

Not really. How many children must die so that you can fulfill your useless obsession to own big assault rifles? Cars have use for everyone.

You didn't read his link did you?
#17 Posted by dave123321 (33625 posts) -

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Have a feeling HQ is air.airshocker

Nonsense. I hate Harley Quinn.

Got my eye on you regardless
#18 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -
I don't own an assault rifle. I own a sporting rifle.

If you're going to be purposefully facetious in an attempt to drum up some sort of outrage, I have no reason to discuss anything withj you.

And yet some people choose not to own or even use a car. The same with guns. Just because you have no use for one doesn't mean that isn't the case for everyone else.airshocker

Cars are universally helpful means of transportation.

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Have a feeling HQ is air.airshocker

Nonsense. I hate Harley Quinn.

Well screw you bigot.
#19 Posted by Diablo-B (4023 posts) -

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]Does it matter, the point remains that guns should be banned. Look at murder rate in the USA compared to far more developed and intellectual nations.airshocker

It does matter. We don't punish the many for the actions of the few. No civilized country does that.

Quick question. I dont claim to be an expert so I try not to make any big declarations on the issue. But would it be wrong to not ban these weapons in question but to have a registration/licensing process that does back ground checks just like we do with owning/buying a car?
#20 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Cars are universally helpful means of transportation.

Well screw you bigot.HarIeyQuinn

And yet cars can sometimes be turned into weapons. The issue isn't the guns, it's the people. Just like the issue with drunk driving isn't the car, it's the people.

I'm not willing to throw away liberties just because those who have been dishonest from the start think banning sporting rifles will save some lives.

Fvck you, clown.

#21 Posted by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -
[QUOTE="airshocker"]I don't own an assault rifle. I own a sporting rifle.

If you're going to be purposefully facetious in an attempt to drum up some sort of outrage, I have no reason to discuss anything withj you.

And yet some people choose not to own or even use a car. The same with guns. Just because you have no use for one doesn't mean that isn't the case for everyone else.HarIeyQuinn

Cars are universally helpful means of transportation.

And guns are a universally helpful means of preventing crime (which they do much more often than as a means of committing crime). What is your point?

#22 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]Cars are universally helpful means of transportation.

Well screw you bigot.airshocker

And yet cars can sometimes be turned into weapons. The issue isn't the guns, it's the people. Just like the issue with drunk driving isn't the car, it's the people.

I'm not willing to throw away liberties just because those who have been dishonest from the start think banning sporting rifles will save some lives.

Fvck you, clown.

Cars are very useful to society. Assault Rifles are not.
#23 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Quick question. I dont claim to be an expert so I try not to make any big declarations on the issue. But would it be wrong to not ban these weapons in question but to have a registration/licensing process that does back ground checks just like we do with owning/buying a car?Diablo-B

We already have licensing for handguns in most states. Yet they are still the gun that causes the most deaths. Rifles don't need to be licensed, but you still have to go through a federal background check conducted by the FBI.

#24 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

Cars are very useful to society. Assault Rifles are not.HarIeyQuinn

Assault rifles aren't sold to society. But it's clear you aren't willing to have an honest discussion on the matter.

#25 Posted by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -
[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]Cars are universally helpful means of transportation.

Well screw you bigot.HarIeyQuinn

And yet cars can sometimes be turned into weapons. The issue isn't the guns, it's the people. Just like the issue with drunk driving isn't the car, it's the people.

I'm not willing to throw away liberties just because those who have been dishonest from the start think banning sporting rifles will save some lives.

Fvck you, clown.

Cars are very useful to society. Assault Rifles are not.

Again, you didn't read his link, did you?
#26 Posted by Diablo-B (4023 posts) -

[QUOTE="Diablo-B"]Quick question. I dont claim to be an expert so I try not to make any big declarations on the issue. But would it be wrong to not ban these weapons in question but to have a registration/licensing process that does back ground checks just like we do with owning/buying a car?airshocker

We already have licensing for handguns in most states. Yet they are still the gun that causes the most deaths. Rifles don't need to be licensed, but you still have to go through a federal background check conducted by the FBI.

True but isnt that a bit incomplete. Its not just hand gun that cause more deaths but unregistered (or illegal) handguns that are the main cause for these deaths. So shouldn't our focus be on improving/making more efficient our registration process and removing the unregistered ones off the street?
#27 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

True but isnt that a bit incomplete. Its not just hand gun that cause more deaths but unregistered (or illegal) handguns that are the main cause for these deaths. So shouldn't our focus be on improving/making more efficient our registration process and removing the unregistered ones off the street?Diablo-B

Not if you're implying making my life more difficult, no. I've already been bent over by my state, I'm not going to do any more compromising until I get some things that I want. Namely, I want these silly crusades against cosmetic features to end.

Our registration process isn't at fault. Our reporting of mental illnesses is at fault. As it stands, NICS can only check what's there. We're SOL if somebody has a mental illness, but it hasn't been reported.

#28 Posted by Diablo-B (4023 posts) -

[QUOTE="Diablo-B"]True but isnt that a bit incomplete. Its not just hand gun that cause more deaths but unregistered (or illegal) handguns that are the main cause for these deaths. So shouldn't our focus be on improving/making more efficient our registration process and removing the unregistered ones off the street?airshocker

Not if you're implying making my life more difficult, no. I've already been bent over by my state, I'm not going to do any more compromising until I get some things that I want. Namely, I want these silly crusades against cosmetic features to end.

Our registration process isn't at fault. Our reporting of mental illnesses is at fault. As it stands, NICS can only check what's there. We're SOL if somebody has a mental illness, but it hasn't been reported.

If making your life more "difficult" is the issue then that sounds very selfish. Reporting mental illness and past crimes do need to be an improved part of the registration process like you pointed out. But since most crimes use unregistered guns that leads me to think that if we could reduce the amount of unregistered guns in circulation that would reduce gun related deaths.
#29 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

If making your life more "difficult" is the issue then that sounds very selfish. Reporting mental illness and past crimes do need to be an improved part of the registration process like you pointed out. But since most crimes use unregistered guns that leads me to think that if we could reduce the amount of unregistered guns in circulation that would reduce gun related deaths.Diablo-B

It's not selfish to want to be treated fairly. As it stands, I'm treated like a criminal. Until that changes, then I'll be more than willing to support any more gun control measures.

What you're talking about is better policing, not gun control.

#30 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]Does it matter, the point remains that guns should be banned. Look at murder rate in the USA compared to far more developed and intellectual nations.airshocker

It does matter. We don't punish the many for the actions of the few. No civilized country does that.

actually we do.
#31 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

actually we do. Rich3232

In what way?

#32 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -

[QUOTE="Rich3232"]actually we do. airshocker

In what way?

drugs, mostly.
#33 Posted by airshocker (28838 posts) -

drugs, mostly. Rich3232

Fair enough, but the point is we shouldn't.

#34 Posted by Rich3232 (2754 posts) -

[QUOTE="Rich3232"]drugs, mostly. airshocker

Fair enough, but the point is we shouldn't.

That we most certainty agree on.
#35 Posted by HarIeyQuinn (26 posts) -
[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Have a feeling HQ is air.dave123321

Nonsense. I hate Harley Quinn.

Got my eye on you regardless

Why? airshocker and I are completely different.
#37 Posted by DaveFanGirl (37 posts) -
Yes emma, it is surprising what is out there.
#38 Posted by VoodooHak (15981 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="HarIeyQuinn"]By that logic, noone should obey traffic laws just because there are some wrecks.HarIeyQuinn

No, by that logic we shouldn't ban cars because there are some idiots who drive drunk.

Not really. How many children must die so that you can fulfill your useless obsession to own big assault rifles? Cars have use for everyone.

Do you know what an assault rifle is? Apparently, you didn't even look at the link provided in the first post in this thread.

Besides, murders committed by a rifle or shotgun is a franction of one percent of all murders committed.

We DID have an "assault weapon ban" for 10 years, and it did NOT work. While that ban was in place, there were 28 mass school shootings, leaving 156 dead. So you want a new ban? And what exactly will that accomplish when history has shown that it did not work?

#39 Posted by XaosII (16535 posts) -

Interesting. I certainly got new information from that link. Very informative though it gota bit sensationalist at the very end and equating modern rifles with muskets was quite a stretch.

I'm personally torn on the issue. I dont use guns at all. But i have had some frustration with gun laws. Im into archery and i like shooting my bow (target practice only - not a fan of hunting). Most locales do not have laws for bows and arrows and simply resort to a "treat them like a gun." Which causes all sorts of weird inconsistencies especially since bows dont require licenses... Oh, and they aren't guns, either.

On one hand, gun ownership of semi-automatics seems fairly resonable. On the other hand, empirical evidence on places like Japan show that extremely tight gun control does have an impact on gun related crimes. In Japan, a civilian can only possess a shotgun (no rifles or handguns) and it is regularly inspected, including the ammunition, and all ammunition transactions are recorded to make sure all bullets are accounted for. Even toy air-rifles required licensure. Japan's gun crime ranges a few dozen per year. But the again the culture of a place like Japan probably has a large part to do with it.

#40 Posted by VoodooHak (15981 posts) -

Interesting. I certainly got new information from that link. Very informative though it gota bit sensationalist at the very end and equating modern rifles with muskets was quite a stretch.

I'm personally torn on the issue. I dont use guns at all. But i have had some frustration with gun laws. Im into archery and i like shooting my bow (target practice only - not a fan of hunting). Most locales do not have laws for bows and arrows and simply resort to a "treat them like a gun." Which causes all sorts of weird inconsistencies especially since bows dont require licenses... Oh, and they aren't guns, either.

On one hand, gun ownership of semi-automatics seems fairly resonable. On the other hand, empirical evidence on places like Japan show that extremely tight gun control does have an impact on gun related crimes. In Japan, a civilian can only possess a shotgun (no rifles or handguns) and it is regularly inspected, including the ammunition, and all ammunition transactions are recorded to make sure all bullets are accounted for. Even toy air-rifles required licensure. Japan's gun crime ranges a few dozen per year. But the again the culture of a place like Japan probably has a large part to do with it.

XaosII

And this is why it's tricky to compare the US to other countries. It only helps to prove that there's more to violence than the availability of guns.