Page 16 of 45 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 442

Thread: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?[W: 207]

  1. #151
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,943

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    I can list all the qualifications for what constitutes an assault weapons here is anyone wants.

  2. #152
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    Yes, you were right.

    Now that your ego has been stroked and your deviation arrested. Do you have anything to say about this topic?

    Or just more word games?
    I have already addressed the question asked in the OP, and several people have posted opinions similar to mine.

    You would know this if you weren't so obsessed with proving me wrong even though you know that I was right
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #153
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo Rodeo View Post
    Because the true functions of these accessories are being labeled "dangerous," when no subsequent increase in danger or lethality is involved. The functions as described by the anti-gun faction are, in fact, cosmetic, as they only "look" more dangerous.

    You failed to answer my question - why should these features such as pistol grips, collapsible stocks, and barrel shrouds be banned?
    If that is the case, then shouldn't the response be an explanation of what those features do and how they do not pose any danger to the public? Wouldn't that be more effective (and honest) than arguing the falsehood that they are purely cosmetic?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  4. #154
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,151

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo Rodeo View Post
    There is plenty of ignorance on both sides of this debate.

    A telescoping stock allows a custom fit for the user and doesn't provide a much smaller package; a rifle with a telescoping stock may save four inches in overall length while collapses, which does not suddenly make a rifle "concealable." A folding stock might save seven or eight inches, and again doesn't magically make an eight pound hunk of metal with a twenty inch barrel "concealable."

    Pistol grips do not make a rifle fire faster nor service targets faster. If that were the case, competition trap and skeet shooters would use pistol grips as their sport involves rapidly changing aim; they do not use pistol grips. The greatest advantage a pistol grip confers is to shorten the overall length of a rifle by maybe two inches, while offering some adjustability for length of pull. Even so, if you combine a pistol grip with a folding stock (in the folded position), you are looking at maybe ten inches shorter overall length (and the rifle is not in a usable configuration when the stock is folded).

    Barrel shrouds are designed to keep the user from burning their hands, nothing more, nothing less. Some shrouds come with rails to mount accessories, such as flash lights, night vision scopes, laser designators, etc... none of which make a rifle deadlier or easier to shoot.

    The arbitrary number of five or seven rounds for a detachable magazine is just that - arbitrary. A magazine change can be performed in less than a second. I can do one in about a second, and I don't have anything in the way of formal training for rapid reloads. A second is not enough time to rush an attacker, especially not from a position of cover that someone would be in if actively being shot at (and not being armed themselves). If you want to eliminate the advantages of a thirty round magazine... then you have to outlaw any magazine, of any capacity. And that is an entirely different debate, one that will not pass the public sniff test.
    It is simple sensationalism to say that COSMETIC features be a basis for banning a gun. It is simply the current administration attacking the constitution that it clearly despises. The attempt to disarm the people is the goal, this safety nonsense is just to garner support from the people to blinded by the party loyalty to get a grip on reality.

  5. #155
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,151

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    I have already addressed the question asked in the OP, and several people have posted opinions similar to mine.

    You would know this if you weren't so obsessed with proving me wrong even though you know that I was right
    You're dismissed.

  6. #156
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,151

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    I can list all the qualifications for what constitutes an assault weapons here is anyone wants.
    no need.

    An assault weapon is a weapon used in an assault. nothing else.

  7. #157
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,151

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    If that is the case, then shouldn't the response be an explanation of what those features do and how they do not pose any danger to the public? Wouldn't that be more effective (and honest) than arguing the falsehood that they are purely cosmetic?
    they are purely cosmetic in most cases.

  8. #158
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,151

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    If that is the case, then shouldn't the response be an explanation of what those features do and how they do not pose any danger to the public? Wouldn't that be more effective (and honest) than arguing the falsehood that they are purely cosmetic?
    I put a bayonet on my pistol because it looks cool. Yup, cosmetic, seems you don't know what cosmetic means

  9. #159
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,943

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    no need.

    An assault weapon is a weapon used in an assault. nothing else.
    Somehow I don't think that "baseball bat" gets legally classified as an assault weapon regardless of how many assaults you make with it.

  10. #160
    Pragmatist
    AlabamaPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 11:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,834

    Re: Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Somehow I don't think that "baseball bat" gets legally classified as an assault weapon regardless of how many assaults you make with it.
    If used during an assault, how else would you classify it?
    I don't often change my signature, but this was just too over the top to let anyone forget with what this country is up against...
    Quote Originally Posted by James D Hill View Post
    I am for gay marriage because it ticks off Jesus freaks and social conservatives. Gays are also good voters because the vote for my side so I fight next to them.

Page 16 of 45 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •