• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

So what makes assault weapons so deadly

beerftw said:
I have done a thread like this before quite a while ago, but it is long buried and there is a renewed hyteria over assault weapons.

To clarify, assault weapons are a made up term, to describe weapons with a military appearance. Assault rifles are either fully auto or have select fire capability, like semi and burst or auto and semi. Assault rifles are not legal to the public except preban.


What is deemed assault weapons are semi automatic rifles with cosmetic features, like a collapsable stock, a pistol grip, or detachable magazine. Despite hysterical belief, assault rifles and weapons were not designed to kill as many people as fast as possible, they do not just mow people down in the military.

The choice for the assault rifle was medium firepower, medium accuracy, medium weight, and medium rounds meant more rounds to carry over heavy rounds, as combat was unpredictable, and less weight equals more moblity. It is a jack of all trades master of none, which the military favors since one rifle can do it all even if not as efficient as other rifles, since no soldier wants to carry 4 weapons and 4 sets of ammo.


So what is the big stink against these rifles, is there any evidence they are so much more deadly than hunting rifles, or pure propoganda?
Click to expand...

no
ne
nee
non
nein
nie

propaganda
 
iguanaman said:
You mean besides the high rate of fire and large 30 shot magazines? Then there is the massive internal damage that the small 223 bullet inflicts when entering flesh. It really is the optimal killing machine for the military or if you are a civilian mass murderer. Not much use for hunting or target shooting either.

Click to expand...

Thanks for illustrating my point so nicely.
 
BretJ said:
They both use identical magazines. They both use the same cartridge. They both are semiautomatic. They are both pistols. They both have the same cyclic rate. So you hit the nail on the head. The one on top looks big and scary. So tell me, what is the difference between the two as far as design and purpose?? Triple dog dare you....(BTW, the one on the top has no military version and is not used by any military anywhere in the world...)
Click to expand...

I was being facetious.

The top is a variant of the AR, it;s not a istiol, but can be used as one without the barrel and butt. So, no - that version was not made by the military just like the feuld and blown 500 inch Hemi was not made by Chrysler...

So, what's your point? Tryin to put one over on me 'er somethin?

If Mateem had used the top variant with 30 round clips,: same effect. Pistol, not the same effect.
 
MickeyW said:
Yes...and many of us in America may have a need for that design and purpose. ;) and it's none of your business, or the governments, to decide what my need is.
Click to expand...


Well you have no legit need other than it's really cool, and the Supreme Court this morning backed that up.
 
ThoughtEx. said:
I wouldn't agree to much with me, the big second amendment people around here think I am a Lefty after their guns because I don't support their line of reasoning on the second amendment. And I think the NRA hard line stance hurts gun rights more than helps.
Click to expand...

The NRA stance is all about sales. They are against anything that might stop even one gun sale. They have become the paid mouthpiece for the gun industry and I have no idea why we should listen to a thing they say.
 
jet57 said:
Well, you said it yourself:

They are combat weapons. Terrorists in this country use them for combat.
Click to expand...

Presumably, anyone who uses any weapon against anyone else is using it for combat of some type.
 
Lutherf said:
As you all know, when you take this rifle

Mini14001.jpg


add a black stock with a pistol grip, a rail and an ACOG the bullets suddenly become incendiary, exploding, heat seeking missiles of mass murder. On top of that anyone who has never had their hands on a rifle before instantly becomes a top tier marksman inflamed with hatred for mankind at large.:roll:

1_rifles_ruger_ranch_rifle_223_tactical_44522_1.jpg


And for those who still don't understand, both pictures show the same model rifle. Both rifles function exactly the same way. The differences are primarily cosmetic. It's kind of like putting new rims, a paint job and a racing seat in your 2005 Celica without touching the motor and suspension.
Click to expand...
The Mini14 was used in the killing of 69 people and wounding of many more in Norway by Anders Breivik. Prior to the attack he killed 8 and wounded 209 with a good old fashioned car bomb made of your garden variety fertilizer.
 
iguanaman said:
You mean besides the high rate of fire and large 30 shot magazines? Then there is the massive internal damage that the small 223 bullet inflicts when entering flesh. It really is the optimal killing machine for the military or if you are a civilian mass murderer. Not much use for hunting or target shooting either.

Click to expand...
I love it when you rush to Youtube and then present a video as if you know anything about what you just posted. Just like that video you posted of how even an 'inexperienced shooter' like Jim Miculek could fire many rounds at a time using AR weapons. I also love how when you are called out on it you just slink away without responding or recanting. Slink away...what am I saying....you are doubling down. Because the truth is truly a casualty in all this.

 
iguanaman said:
The NRA stance is all about sales. They are against anything that might stop even one gun sale. They have become the paid mouthpiece for the gun industry and I have no idea why we should listen to a thing they say.
Click to expand...

That's just flat out stupid.

The biggest driver for gun purchases is attempts to ban guns. Every time the pants pissing faction of the left wing decides to push a piece of legislation that limits the rights of lawful citizens more and more people who have never had a desire to own a firearm go out and buy one. The reason they do that is because they fear the overreaction of the government more than they fear getting shot.

The NRA doesn't have to promote the gun industry. Folks like you do a better job than they ever could.
 
Lutherf said:
That's just flat out stupid.

The biggest driver for gun purchases is attempts to ban guns. Every time the pants pissing faction of the left wing decides to push a piece of legislation that limits the rights of lawful citizens more and more people who have never had a desire to own a firearm go out and buy one. The reason they do that is because they fear the overreaction of the government more than they fear getting shot.

The NRA doesn't have to promote the gun industry. Folks like you do a better job than they ever could.
Click to expand...
Any time an anti-gun leftist begins talking guns, sales go up. WTH would the NRA be concerned about 'sales'???
 
beerftw said:
What rapid fire? it fires at the same rate as practically every semi auto weapon. And 30 round mags do not make it more deadly, people act like switching magazines somehow requires a degree in science and 30 minutes of effort to accomplish, reality is it takes literally a second or two to switch.

High capacity or should I say standard capacity are more convenient than deadly, heck even someone skilled with a blackpowder revolver from 1858 could carry multiple cylinders and swap them in seconds, which is still ten times the work required to swap magazines.
Click to expand...

Not to mention most people are running because they are "unarmed" and any gun could or would cause a high body count if the perp were motivated.

Gun Free Zones are Invitational Kill Zones.
 
jet57 said:
I was being facetious.

The top is a variant of the AR, it;s not a istiol, but can be used as one without the barrel and butt. So, no - that version was not made by the military just like the feuld and blown 500 inch Hemi was not made by Chrysler...

So, what's your point? Tryin to put one over on me 'er somethin?

If Mateem had used the top variant with 30 round clips,: same effect. Pistol, not the same effect.
Click to expand...

The firearm on top is a pistol. Both are pistols. Both have the exact same capabilities. The military has never fielded an AR pistol. Did not put one over on you at all. Just highlighted what you previously said, " the top one looks scary". When in actuality both pistols are exactly the same. The magazines are interchangeable between the Glock and the AR9. Both are pistols except one has a recoil spring behind the bolt vice below the barrel. Both fire 9mm. They have the same cyclic rate.... so one more time...what makes the top one any more dangerous than the bottom one? Scarier is not a good answer....nor is "because bad people have used them"...
 
jet57 said:
Well you have no legit need other than it's really cool, and the Supreme Court this morning backed that up.
Click to expand...


That is a Bald Face LIE, Mr. jet! I've seen plenty of need in many places, you have no experience in these matters and you spout off BS as thou you do.


They refused to hear the case....that means they don't want to be involved in it.

That's your opinion, and to me, worth nothing!

An AR15 or AK47 can be used for anything any other semi-auto rifle can be used for...
 
Last edited:
MickeyW said:
That is a Bald Face LIE, Mr. jet! They refused to hear the case....that means they don't want to be involved in it.

That's your opinion, and to me, worth nothing!

An AR15 or AK47 can be used for anything any other semi-auto rifle can be used for...
Click to expand...

It means they are letting the lower court ruling stand. That is still getting involved.
 
VanceMack said:
I love it when you rush to Youtube and then present a video as if you know anything about what you just posted. Just like that video you posted of how even an 'inexperienced shooter' like Jim Miculek could fire many rounds at a time using AR weapons. I also love how when you are called out on it you just slink away without responding or recanting. Slink away...what am I saying....you are doubling down. Because the truth is truly a casualty in all this.

Click to expand...


Be honest, if you need a 30 shot magazine semi-auto to hunt a hog or a deer you are not a hunter.

As one hunter put it in the comments section of an article on americanhunter.org, “I served in the military and the M16A2/M4 was the weapon I used for 20 years. It is first and foremost designed as an assault weapon platform, no matter what the spin. A hunter does not need a semi-automatic rifle to hunt, if he does he sucks, and should go play video games. I see more men running around the bush all cammo'd up with assault vests and face paint with tricked out AR's. These are not hunters but wannabe weekend warriors.”

In terms of repelling a home invasion—which is what most people mean when they talk about home defense—an AR-15-style rifle is probably less useful than a handgun. The AR-15 is a long gun, and can be tough to maneuver in tight quarters. When you shoot it, it’ll overpenetrate—sending bullets through the walls of your house and possibly into the walls of your neighbor’s house—unless you purchase the sort of ammunition that fragments on impact. (This is true for other guns, as well, but, again, the thing with the AR-15 is that it lets you fire more rounds faster.)

AR-15–style rifles are very useful, however, if what you’re trying to do is sell guns. In a recent Forbes article, Abram Brown reported that “gun ownership is at a near 20-year high, generating $4 billion in commercial gun and ammunition sales.” But that money’s not coming from selling shotguns and bolt-action rifles to pheasant hunters.
Click to expand...
Gun control AR-15 rifle: The NRA claims the AR-15 rifle is for hunting and home defense. Not exactly.
 
iguanaman said:
Be honest, if you need a 30 shot magazine semi-auto to hunt a hog or a deer you are not a hunter.


Gun control AR-15 rifle: The NRA claims the AR-15 rifle is for hunting and home defense. Not exactly.
Click to expand...
I dont need a 30 round magazine to hunt with. I need a 30 round magazine to defend my home with and if God forbid it should come to it, to join with the rest of the citizens in this country that comprise the unorganized militia and to supplement the organized militia as a last line of defense of the Constitution against tyranny. The 2nd Amendment wasnt written to protect hunting rights; it was written to protect the citizens rights to keep and bare arms and to preserve freedom.

Magazine capacity however was not your ridiculous point earlier. Thats just the bugaboo you have shifted to since it has been clearly demonstrated that the AR 15 in fact makes a SWEET hunting rifle.
 
iguanaman said:
Be honest, if you need a 30 shot magazine semi-auto to hunt a hog or a deer you are not a hunter.
Click to expand...

Even the large magazine argument is ridiculous, it's politicians who don't know their asses from their elbows who make up these useless regulations!
A lunatic who is ready to take the lives of others could care less if he uses an illegal high capacity magazine, he's already decided he's probably dying that day!

 
iguanaman said:
Be honest, if you need a 30 shot magazine semi-auto to hunt a hog or a deer you are not a hunter.
Click to expand...

I don't hunt larger game with an AR or an AK....that's mostly reserved for worthless scum and gang bangers. However, many Feral Hogs cannot be taken with one shot.

I did bring down a small deer once with a head shot from my Glock 9mm.

However, when I go out hunting for jack rabbits and squirrels that devastate farm crops, that 30 round mag is real handy because there are hundreds of them to shoot at and I normally bring about ten 30 round mags ....for a morning shoot! Have lunch, reload and go out again in the afternoon.
One or two 30 round mags........... are not nearly enough.

It's obvious to me, that neither you, nor many other anti-gun people on here, have experienced anything like that, probably know squat about hunting or guns and are just here to antagonize with your misdirection and ignorance!

VanceMack said:
I dont need a 30 round magazine to hunt with. I need a 30 round magazine to defend my home with and if God forbid it should come to it, to join with the rest of the citizens in this country that comprise the unorganized militia and to supplement the organized militia as a last line of defense of the Constitution against tyranny. The 2nd Amendment wasnt written to protect hunting rights; it was written to protect the citizens rights to keep and bare arms and to preserve freedom.

Magazine capacity however was not your ridiculous point earlier. That's just the bugaboo you have shifted to since it has been clearly demonstrated that the AR 15 in fact makes a SWEET hunting rifle.
Click to expand...

All correct. You have their number VM! ;)
 
justlikethat said:
Even the large magazine argument is ridiculous, it's politicians who don't know their asses from their elbows who make up these useless regulations!
A lunatic who is ready to take the lives of others could care less if he uses an illegal high capacity magazine, he's already decided he's probably dying that day!
Click to expand...

Yes....the liberals on here wrongly think they have superior knowledge on this topic....but we know they don't know diddly squat!

The asshole politicians like the ones in Ct., don't really care if we can defend ourselves against an armed intruder or attacker. All they care about is political points and mush for brains liberals.
Same applies to those mush for brains liberals on here.
 
iguanaman said:
Be honest, if you need a 30 shot magazine semi-auto to hunt a hog or a deer you are not a hunter.


Gun control AR-15 rifle: The NRA claims the AR-15 rifle is for hunting and home defense. Not exactly.[/url]
Click to expand...

Home defense can mean a lot of different things. Not just inside the home but outside the home. Many people around me live on 10 to 100 acres of land. The Sheriff's office response time can be 30-45 min. A homeowner doesn't have that luxury of waiting. When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

If you have a group of thugs, in your 100 yard driveway, or further, a handgun will not defend most folks.

I have a friend in Missouri who has a 425 acre ranch and his driveway is 3 miles long. If someone is out there shooting at him or his wife, he needs to return fire.

So....................your example above does not fit all encounters and you, know nothing about it! Only what you read about!
 
iguanaman said:
The NRA stance is all about sales. They are against anything that might stop even one gun sale. They have become the paid mouthpiece for the gun industry and I have no idea why we should listen to a thing they say.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm.. perhaps because they are experts when it comes to firearms safety, firearms laws, firearms use?

There is no agency that does more for firearms safety than the NRA. And not just the average joe.. but whole police departments. They put forth millions of dollars in safe gun ranges so people have safe places to use their firearms.

While the anti gun groups are generally funded by one or two very wealthy people.. such as Soros, or Bloomberg. AND DO ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING TO PROMOTE GUN SAFETY.... and in fact.. stand in the way of gun safety.

The NRA derives its political influence because millions of average americans who support it.

As organizations go.. the single most important organization promoting firearm safety and truly SENSIBLE firearm regulation is the NRA.
 
jaeger19 said:
Hmmmm.. perhaps because they are experts when it comes to firearms safety, firearms laws, firearms use?

There is no agency that does more for firearms safety than the NRA. And not just the average joe.. but whole police departments. They put forth millions of dollars in safe gun ranges so people have safe places to use their firearms.

While the anti gun groups are generally funded by one or two very wealthy people.. such as Soros, or Bloomberg. AND DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO PROMOTE GUN SAFETY.... and in fact.. stand in the way of gun safety.

The NRA derives its political influence because millions of average Americans who support it.

As organizations go.. the single most important organization promoting firearm safety and truly SENSIBLE firearm regulation is the NRA.
Click to expand...

Stellar post and as true as it gets.
 
AGENT J said:
no
ne
nee
non
nein
nie

propaganda
Click to expand...

Yep...Lefty douchebag propaganda!

jet57 said:
I was being facetious.

The top is a variant of the AR, it;s not a istiol, but can be used as one without the barrel and butt. So, no - that version was not made by the military just like the feuld and blown 500 inch Hemi was not made by Chrysler...

So, what's your point? Tryin to put one over on me 'er somethin?

If Mateem had used the top variant with 30 round clips,: same effect. Pistol, not the same effect.
Click to expand...

Why not? Please explain.

iguanaman said:
The NRA stance is all about sales. They are against anything that might stop even one gun sale. They have become the paid mouthpiece for the gun industry and I have no idea why we should listen to a thing they say.
Click to expand...

What a stupid, idiotic assertion!

matchlight said:
Presumably, anyone who uses any weapon against anyone else is using it for combat of some type.
Click to expand...

YES!

Lutherf said:
That's just flat out stupid.

The biggest driver for gun purchases is attempts to ban guns. Every time the pants pissing faction of the left wing decides to push a piece of legislation that limits the rights of lawful citizens more and more people who have never had a desire to own a firearm go out and buy one. The reason they do that is because they fear the overreaction of the government more than they fear getting shot.

The NRA doesn't have to promote the gun industry. Folks like you do a better job than they ever could.
Click to expand...

Fully agree...all correct....stupid as it gets from said poster.

VanceMack said:
Any time an anti-gun leftist begins talking guns, sales go up. WTH would the NRA be concerned about 'sales'???
Click to expand...

Exactly.

These numskull, mush for brains liberals, may have gotten and education in public schools, but it was limited in scope!
 
MickeyW said:
Yep...Lefty douchebag propaganda!
Click to expand...
as soon as you call it "lefty" the rest of your post is pretty meaningless and your views prove to be part of the problem instead of the solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom