• 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!

Boulder Gun Owners Defiant Of Assault Weapon Ban

Rucker61 said:
What part of the current semiautomatic AR-15 was designed and made for combat?
Click to expand...

the bayonet lug? that's the only thing I can think of-and those of us who actually own AR 15s know that this lug is used because surplus numbers for these things are high and they serve another purpose on the rifle that would be more expensive to make-rather than using the surplus available
 
TurtleDude said:
the bayonet lug? that's the only thing I can think of-and those of us who actually own AR 15s know that this lug is used because surplus numbers for these things are high and they serve another purpose on the rifle that would be more expensive to make-rather than using the surplus available
Click to expand...

That's all I can find. The other possible item might be the pistol grip, but it's not necessary for a service rifle given that neither the M1 nor the M14 had one. Plus, the first rifle/carbine with a pistol grip I can find was the Delvigne Patent carbine from 1840, which definitely wasn't a military weapon. The Nylon 66 was the first rifle released in the US with plastic hardware, beating the M16 by five years.

LESOINNE ET PIRLOT FILS, LIEGE A RARE .69 PERCUSSION RIFLED SINGLE-SHOT CARBINE, MODEL 'DELVIGNE PATENT', no visible serial number,
 
jet57 said:
The whole of the world did, and still does.

It was "God and guns" thinking that got 19 innocent people killed in Salem MASS.
Click to expand...

Yes. The whole world mocks Christians for believing God. The whole world thinks Christians are deplorables. The whole world is the enemy of God (James 4:4.) That has been true for thousands of years.
 
jet57 said:
Not made up, factual and so such guns got banned.

Anything else?

NO?
Click to expand...

Weren't you just mocking another poster who was listing the technicalities and how they didn't affect anything?
 
Maccabee said:
Weren't you just mocking another poster who was listing the technicalities and how they didn't affect anything?
Click to expand...

Nope: I was posting facts that certain posters, yourself among them, refuse to accept.
 
jet57 said:
Nope: I was posting facts that certain posters, yourself among them, refuse to accept.
Click to expand...

You seem unable to accept that AR-15s are in common use for lawful purposes according to SCOTUS.

What are the military parts of the AR-15? What are the parts that were "made and designed for combat"?
 
Rucker61 said:
You seem unable to accept that AR-15s are in common use for lawful purposes according to SCOTUS.

What are the military parts of the AR-15? What are the parts that were "made and designed for combat"?
Click to expand...

Heller talking points again eh?

The AR15 was specifically designed for military use in combat and you know that. I've proved it over and over again to you and TD and the rest of the gun crowd here.

AND when using Heller language you all conveniently leave out that the second IS NOT an unlimited right so said Scalia who wrote the decision.

Get over it dude, 'ya lost.
 
jet57 said:
Heller talking points again eh?

The AR15 was specifically designed for military use in combat and you know that.
Click to expand...


Specifically, what parts of the AR-15 were designed for combat, other than the bayonet lug?

What part of the design is for combat?

I've proved it over and over again to you and TD and the rest of the gun crowd here
Click to expand...
.

AND when using Heller language you all conveniently leave out that the second IS NOT an unlimited right so said Scalia who wrote the decision.

Get over it dude, 'ya lost.
Click to expand...

He didn't say any restriction was Constitutional. You keep avoiding that part. He also mentioned that firearms in common use for lawful purposes were protected. Caetano says that weapons sold to the public in excess of "hundreds of thousands" are in common use. The AR-15 sales to the public exceed that by 10 million or so.

Why can the AR-15 be banned but not the M1911?
 
jet57 said:
And AR15s weren't used.
Click to expand...

So? Within that time period, the number mass shootings and the number of people shot did not decreased. We had the largest mass shooting at the time happen during the ban. AR15s doesn't make a difference in how many are shot. In fact, 60% of all mass shootings are done with handguns.
 
Maccabee said:
So? Within that time period, the number mass shootings and the number of people shot did not decreased. We had the largest mass shooting at the time happen during the ban. AR15s doesn't make a difference in how many are shot. In fact, 60% of all mass shootings are done with handguns.
Click to expand...

Nonsense; the Las Vegas shooting proves you absolutely wrong as does Sacalia, so peddle your BS elsewhere dude, I'm not buyin it.
 
Maccabee said:
What did I refused to accept?
Click to expand...

ALL of the factual information that I've posted on this issue that proves you to be quite wrong.

The Dems are coming you know in 2020, so, just sayin...
 
Rucker61 said:
Specifically, what parts of the AR-15 were designed for combat, other than the bayonet lug?

What part of the design is for combat?



He didn't say any restriction was Constitutional. You keep avoiding that part. He also mentioned that firearms in common use for lawful purposes were protected. Caetano says that weapons sold to the public in excess of "hundreds of thousands" are in common use. The AR-15 sales to the public exceed that by 10 million or so.

Why can the AR-15 be banned but not the M1911?
Click to expand...

On the Military and Civilian History of the AR-15 - The Atlantic

Back in the 1980s, I wrote a long detailed article about the design concepts that the AR-15’s creator, Eugene Stoner, put into this weapon, and the ways it changed before going into service as the military’s M-16. If you want to know about the “barrel twist” differences in various models of the rifle, or the controversy about its bullet size, or how the AR-15 and M-16 compare with the Soviet-designed AK-47, or why it uses the kind of gunpowder it does, I would direct you to that article. (Or—please!—at least consider reading the article before firing off an incensed complaint that I haven’t addressed any of those aspects.)
Click to expand...

Enough already Rucker. Once again I'm proving to you exactly why the AR and other combat weaponry was banned from public sale. Face it, you all lost the argument, so splitting hairs and trying to technicality the thing to death only shows that you guys have zero ability to prove that the '94 assault weapons ban was not smart policy given the destructive power of these things, why? Because - that - is - what - they - were - designed - to - do - for - military - combat - purposes.

:2wave:

/
 
jet57 said:
On the Military and Civilian History of the AR-15 - The Atlantic



Enough already Rucker. Once again I'm proving to you exactly why the AR and other combat weaponry was banned from public sale. Face it, you all lost the argument, so splitting hairs and trying to technicality the thing to death only shows that you guys have zero ability to prove that the '94 assault weapons ban was not smart policy given the destructive power of these things, why? Because - that - is - what - they - were - designed - to - do - for - military - combat - purposes.

:2wave:

/
Click to expand...

It wasn't banned from public sale. It hadn't even been used in a mass shooting prior to 1994, and wasn't even used in a mass shooting by a civilian until 2012. The Mini-14 and M1 Carbine, the latter of which is actual combat weaponry, had been used in mass shootings in the years right before the 1994 AWB and neither were banned. It therefore wasn't banned because it was used in mass shootings, and it wasn't banned because it was a combat weapon. M1As, a direct copy of the M14, weren't banned. M1s weren't banned.

As has been explained before, the only two "combat" features were the selective fire capability and the bayonet lug. Every single other feature of the rifle had been used in civilian sporting weapons prior to their use in the military M-16 or civilian AR-15. Combining a bunch of features and capabilities doesn't make a combat weapon, especially a weapon that's never seen combat. Semiautomatic rifles were first made for hunting in the US in 1905. The .222 cartridge was a varmint round from 1950. The pistol grip was first used on sporting gun in 1840.

You spend a lot of time here defending your specious position on the AR-15. The M1 Carbine is a combat weapon that's been used in mass shootings. The Mini-14 is a semiautomatic, magazine fed rifle chambered in 5.56mm NATO with the exact same capabilities as the AR-15, and has been used in mass shootings including the one in Norway that holds the records for single shooter deaths. Both are specifically exempted by the California assault weapons ban and the 2019 federal AWB bill sponsored by Sen Feinstein of California, who may or may not be your senator.

Have you written a single letter or email to your state representatives or Sen. Feinstein demanding that these dangerous military style semiautomatic weapons be stripped of their exempt status and be banned along with the AR-15? If you haven't, what is the number of deaths you will accept from these before you'll take necessary action.
 
jet57 said:
Nonsense; the Las Vegas shooting proves you absolutely wrong as does Sacalia, so peddle your BS elsewhere dude, I'm not buyin it.
Click to expand...

No, he's right. Most mass shootings are done with handguns, typically a .22 or 9mm pistol. Shotguns are also popular. One shooting in Las Vegas is not 'most'. One shooting in Sacalia is not 'most'.
 
jet57 said:
On the Military and Civilian History of the AR-15 - The Atlantic



Enough already Rucker. Once again I'm proving to you exactly why the AR and other combat weaponry was banned from public sale.
Click to expand...
They aren't. They are only banned for public sale in your area. You can still get them in your area on the black market.
jet57 said:
Face it, you all lost the argument,
Click to expand...
Assertion fallacy. Thought terminating cliche fallacy.
jet57 said:
so splitting hairs and trying to technicality the thing to death
Click to expand...
He's not.
jet57 said:
only shows that you guys have zero ability to prove that the '94 assault weapons ban was not smart policy given the destructive power of these things, why?
Click to expand...
They are no more destructive than a lot of guns. The AR-15 is a semiautomatic rifle.
jet57 said:
Because - that - is - what - they - were - designed - to - do - for - military - combat - purposes.
Click to expand...
The .22 pistol, the 9mm pistol, the shotgun, bolt action rifles, semiautomatic rifles, and fully automatic rifles are all used by the military, dude. Nothing in the 2nd amendment specifies a ban on any military use of a gun. AR-15 designs are very versatile. They are not typically used by the military, since they have fully automatic guns. It makes an excellent weapon for home defense in longer range situations (such as defending a ranch), and are good hunting rifles as well. The phrase 'assault rifle' is a buzzword. It is meaningless. Any gun can be used to assault. Indeed, any weapon at all can be used to assault. Bare handed can be used to assault.
 
jet57 said:
Nonsense; the Las Vegas shooting proves you absolutely wrong as does Sacalia, so peddle your BS elsewhere dude, I'm not buyin it.
Click to expand...

How does one mass shooting proves me wrong?
 
jet57 said:
ALL of the factual information that I've posted on this issue that proves you to be quite wrong.

The Dems are coming you know in 2020, so, just sayin...
Click to expand...

What information? Provide a link.
 
jet57 said:
Nonsense; the Las Vegas shooting proves you absolutely wrong as does Sacalia, so peddle your BS elsewhere dude, I'm not buyin it.
Click to expand...

So tell us Jet-what laws would have stopped a guy with ten million in assets, a clean record, a pilot's license and 24/7 access to two airplanes-=both which could take him to Mexico or South America down and back in less than a few hours.
 
jet57 said:
ALL of the factual information that I've posted on this issue that proves you to be quite wrong.

The Dems are coming you know in 2020, so, just sayin...
Click to expand...

SO what does that mean? a civil war? or the USSC slapping them around?
 
jet57 said:
On the Military and Civilian History of the AR-15 - The Atlantic



Enough already Rucker. Once again I'm proving to you exactly why the AR and other combat weaponry was banned from public sale. Face it, you all lost the argument, so splitting hairs and trying to technicality the thing to death only shows that you guys have zero ability to prove that the '94 assault weapons ban was not smart policy given the destructive power of these things, why? Because - that - is - what - they - were - designed - to - do - for - military - combat - purposes.

:2wave:

/
Click to expand...

yawn, your stupid rantings about the AR 15 are irrelevant to supreme court rulings and the second amendment.
 
Phys251 said:
Seems like my simple answers confuse you. Let me make it even clearer for you then: If you don't support local control, then you are going back on one of the core principles of conservatism. Maybe you're a bigger fan of federal control than you want to admit?
Click to expand...

And why do you think you get to determine what a core principle of conservatism is? Insidious laws have a way of creeping across borders, and even into houses. He's right. It's time to tell them to stuff it. Boulder is a bastion of liberalism, and that kind of "lawmaking" needs to be stopped dead in its tracks..
 
Actually, I am rather curious to see how it would be enforced...….door to door searches of private dwellings?


I do not think any judge will issue a citywide search warrant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom