• 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!

200 house democrats sign on to assault weapons ban bill of 2019

Bullseye said:
Does he do comprehensive background checks?
Click to expand...


At work yes, he works for a company that has an FTP, however not private sales. He builds them shoots them for a while then decides he wants something else so he sells one.
 
GDViking said:
Where the hell are you from where you don't think a .223 isn't used for hunting?

And yes the ammo can be far cheaper in bulk.

9mm are fine for plinking and close range self defence but they are useless at any distance...
Click to expand...

I dunno, Jerry Miculeck can hit a target at 1,000 yards with a 9mm.
 
apdst said:
Man, have you seen how he trolls you people? He can manipulate you all so easily. Literally, all he has to do is propose something, anything, and you all will disagree with it...lol.

Do I trust him with my guns rights? We'll see. But...I sure as hell don't trust any Democrat with my gun rights.
Click to expand...

Only the people that have bought his bull**** believe he has any ability to do anything the man is a moron and when he speaks his cultists stand around going ewwww ahhhhh like they're watching fireworks, then they go home and watch fox to find out what he meant to say.

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could throw him up a hill, a
Particularly when it comes to my gun rights...
 
GDViking said:
Only the people that have bought his bull**** believe he has any ability to do anything the man is a moron and when he speaks his cultists stand around going ewwww ahhhhh like they're watching fireworks, then they go home and watch fox to find out what he meant to say.

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could throw him up a hill, a
Particularly when it comes to my gun rights...
Click to expand...

But you trust the Democrats? The same Democrats who have told you they're going to strip you of your rights?
 
Airyaman said:
Here's the problem. You have a semi-automatic rifle problem right now...
Click to expand...

Your opinion noted. Personally, I don't see that such a problem exists.

...No one can really say why regular citizens need them while mass murderers are using them to commit mass murder. There IS that.

So really, what is your appeal? You can't hunt with a .223, why else do you need one? Shooting squirrels?

.223 ammo is not even that cheap. 9mm is cheaper by far. .22lr is cheaper still, but rimfire...and I'm not certain 9mm is approved for hunting either.

Face it, there is no real need for .223 semi-auto rifles. No one here really belongs to any well-regulated militia.
Click to expand...

Even if your assertions were true (they aren't), need is irrelevant. If I want a .223 firearm, I intend to have one. Or more. And as much ammo as I can afford.

Now 7.62...not a hunting caliber, not here in the states. But still, not a common caliber for hunting in 'Merica.
Click to expand...

Now you are displaying your lack of knowledge. 7.62 is still quite popular for hunting medium game, although I will admit that it has been eclipsed in recent years. Chalk up the lack of popularity to the wide variety of calibers available here in the US.

What is this fascination with guns?
Click to expand...

Try it some time. Even if you don't take up the avocation (personally, it has kept me from becoming affluent) you might at least come to understand the fascination.
 
GDViking said:
Only the people that have bought his bull**** believe he has any ability to do anything the man is a moron and when he speaks his cultists stand around going ewwww ahhhhh like they're watching fireworks, then they go home and watch fox to find out what he meant to say.

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could throw him up a hill, a
Particularly when it comes to my gun rights...
Click to expand...

If Hillary had filled those two supreme court seats-how do you think her appointments would be on gun rights?
 
TurtleDude said:
If Hillary had filled those two supreme court seats-how do you think her appointments would be on gun rights?
Click to expand...

Until they strike down assault weapons bans and so called high capacity magazine bans its too early to be celebrating Trump's nominees as a victory for gun rights. Because some republicans are also anti-2nd amendment trash.
 
GDViking said:
Only the people that have bought his bull**** believe he has any ability to do anything the man is a moron and when he speaks his cultists stand around going ewwww ahhhhh like they're watching fireworks, then they go home and watch fox to find out what he meant to say.

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could throw him up a hill, a
Particularly when it comes to my gun rights...
Click to expand...

:applaud
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Well it is comforting to know that any semi-auto pistol with a barrel shroud (is that slide now a "military" feature?) is to be considered an assault weapon thus cannot have more than a 10 round magazine. This is sure to pass easily in the Senate. ;)
Click to expand...

Assault weapon is nothing more than code for semiautomatic firearm ban. Because these anti-2nd amendment trash can't honestly say that pistol with a barrel shroud or some other cosmetic feature is somehow more deadly than one without.
 
jamesrage said:
Assault weapon is nothing more than code for semiautomatic firearm ban. Because these anti-2nd amendment trash can't honestly say that pistol with a barrel shroud or some other cosmetic feature is somehow more deadly than one without.
Click to expand...

The "logic" seems to be that if it looks too much like a machine gun then it really is one.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The "logic" seems to be that if it looks too much like a machine gun then it really is one.
Click to expand...

That was exactly the reasoning behind arch gun banning scum bag Josh Sugarmann's propaganda piece he sent to left wing media types in the mid 80s.


Assault Weapon Weirdness

Assault weapons... are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons–anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun–can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons"


...Hence, the phrase “powerful weapon of war” to generically describe “assault weapons” invokes the fear of war. Facts, the differences between civilian and military incarnations of certain rifles and the utter disconnect created by broad “assault weapons” classifications are unimportant to voters. Not being shot by a “powerful weapon of war” is.
 
Airyaman said:
That source seems...biased.
What else ya got?
Click to expand...
It links directly to an article on TheHill.com and directly to the House of Representatives website for the bill.


Airyaman said:
Here's the problem. You have a semi-automatic rifle problem right now.
Click to expand...
No we don't. Those victims would be just as dead if they were killed with a pump-action weapon.


Airyaman said:
No one can really say why regular citizens need them
Click to expand...
We don't have to need them. We have the right to have them.


Airyaman said:
while mass murderers are using them to commit mass murder.
Click to expand...
The victims would be just as dead if they were killed with a pump-action weapon.


Airyaman said:
So really, what is your appeal?
Click to expand...
We don't accept having our civil liberties violated.


Airyaman said:
You can't hunt with a .223,
Click to expand...
Yes you can.


Airyaman said:
why else do you need one? Shooting squirrels?
Click to expand...
We don't have to need them. We have the right to have them.


Airyaman said:
.223 ammo is not even that cheap.
Click to expand...
It's among the cheapest of the centerfire rifle rounds.


Airyaman said:
Face it, there is no real need for .223 semi-auto rifles.
Click to expand...
We don't have to need them. We have the right to have them.


Airyaman said:
No one here really belongs to any well-regulated militia.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.


Airyaman said:
The only prior need for .223 ammo, aka 5.56mm was for ammo used to fight in war.
Click to expand...
What is this "need" gibberish? The .223 has long been used for varmint hunting.


Airyaman said:
Now 7.62...not a hunting caliber, not here in the states. But still, not a common caliber for hunting in 'Merica.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. The .308 is often used by hunters. So are many other .30 caliber rifle rounds.


Airyaman said:
What is this fascination with guns?
Click to expand...
We like our civil liberties.
 
Airyaman said:
That source seems...biased.

What else ya got?

Here's the problem. You have a semi-automatic rifle problem right now. No one can really say why regular citizens need them while mass murderers are using them to commit mass murder. There IS that.

So really, what is your appeal? You can't hunt with a .223, why else do you need one? Shooting squirrels?

.223 ammo is not even that cheap. 9mm is cheaper by far. .22lr is cheaper still, but rimfire...and I'm not certain 9mm is approved for hunting either.

Face it, there is no real need for .223 semi-auto rifles. No one here really belongs to any well-regulated militia.

The only prior need for .223 ammo, aka 5.56mm was for ammo used to fight in war.

Now 7.62...not a hunting caliber, not here in the states. But still, not a common caliber for hunting in 'Merica.

What is this fascination with guns?
Click to expand...

:doh

Literally nothing you wrote has anything to do with "assault weapons".

Not all semiautomatic rifles are "assault weapons," and the proposed ban has nothing to do with the caliber of the weapon. There are 9mm ARs, 7.62 ARs, and .308 ARs.

And nobody should have to prove they "need" anything, if they have a constitutional right to own it, or if there's no good reason to prohibit it, both of which are the case for "assault weapons."
 
Airyaman said:
That source seems...biased.

What else ya got?

Here's the problem. You have a semi-automatic rifle problem right now. No one can really say why regular citizens need them while mass murderers are using them to commit mass murder. There IS that.
Click to expand...
Semi-auto pistols are used for far more murders than semi-auto rifles. I mean seriously, you think I shouldn't own my .22lr rifle because someone else used another type of semi-automatic rifle for a mass murder?

So really, what is your appeal? You can't hunt with a .223, why else do you need one? Shooting squirrels?

.223 ammo is not even that cheap. 9mm is cheaper by far. .22lr is cheaper still, but rimfire...and I'm not certain 9mm is approved for hunting either.
Click to expand...
WAit,why are you switching from talking about semi-automatic rifles to .223? Which can certainly be used for hunting varmints and predators. And you do realize that there are many bolt-action rifles chambered in .223?

Your argument is unclear: are you opposed to all semi-automatic rifles, all rifles chambered in .223, or only those semi-automatic rifles chambered in .223?

Face it, there is no real need for .223 semi-auto rifles. No one here really belongs to any well-regulated militia.

The only prior need for .223 ammo, aka 5.56mm was for ammo used to fight in war.
Click to expand...
So is it your claim that without semi-auto rifles chambered in .223, That potential mass murders will decide not to, or be less efficient shooting .22-250, or 6mm creedmoor?
Now, me personally, I don't feel I have a need for a .223 rifle. Hell, you could make the argument I don't need any guns at all: I don't hunt and I live in a very very safe neighborhood. But should I be legally barred from owning guns because I don't need them? Or anyone from owning a particular gun you decide they don't need?


Now 7.62...not a hunting caliber, not here in the states. But still, not a common caliber for hunting in 'Merica.
Click to expand...
7.62x39mm or 7.62x51mm (aka .308 winchester)? .308 is extremely common for hunting, and 7.62x39mm is pretty common too.
 
apdst said:
When some folks say the gun-grabbers aren't coming for everything: that a damn lie.

200 House Democrats Sign On to Assault Weapons Ban Bill of 2019 - The Truth About Guns
Click to expand...
The criteria: The term semiautomatic assault weapon means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.
(iv) A grenade launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.
(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A threaded barrel.
(ii) A second pistol grip.
(iii) A barrel shroud.
(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
(vi) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.
(vii) A stabilizing brace or similar component.
(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any one of the following:
(i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(ii) A pistol grip.
(iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
(iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(v) A forward grip.
(vi) A grenade launcher.
(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof.......


So, my Ruger 10/22 takedown is classified as an assault weapon because it has a threaded barrel. And because it's a takedown model. And my Walther P22 pistol also has a threaded barrel.

So both my .22lr guns are considered under this law more dangerous than my .357 magnum revolver? 10 rounds of .22lr is not more dangerous than 6 rounds of .357 magnum.

And my next gun will be a .357 magnum lever action rifle...also say more dangerous than my .22 semi-automatic.

The bill makes no sense in its criteria! If it looks scary, it's dangerous.
 
pinqy said:
The criteria: The term semiautomatic assault weapon means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.
(iv) A grenade launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.
(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A threaded barrel.
(ii) A second pistol grip.
(iii) A barrel shroud.
(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
(vi) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.
(vii) A stabilizing brace or similar component.
(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any one of the following:
(i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(ii) A pistol grip.
(iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
(iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(v) A forward grip.
(vi) A grenade launcher.
(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof.......


So, my Ruger 10/22 takedown is classified as an assault weapon because it has a threaded barrel. And because it's a takedown model. And my Walther P22 pistol also has a threaded barrel.

So both my .22lr guns are considered under this law more dangerous than my .357 magnum revolver? 10 rounds of .22lr is not more dangerous than 6 rounds of .357 magnum.

And my next gun will be a .357 magnum lever action rifle...also say more dangerous than my .22 semi-automatic.

The bill makes no sense in its criteria! If it looks scary, it's dangerous.
Click to expand...

That's why they chose said criteria; to play on peoples' fears. They know that without the "scary stuff" they know that even the Fudds would laugh at them.

Even in
 
BlueTex said:
I read the bill... Where in the bill are they "coming for everything"? Existing weapons will be grandfathered, the bill just prohibits importation and manufacture of new weapons.
Click to expand...
OH well if that's all. They can throw it in the trash.
 
pinqy said:
The criteria: The term semiautomatic assault weapon means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

(A) A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.
(iv) A grenade launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.
(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(i) A threaded barrel.
(ii) A second pistol grip.
(iii) A barrel shroud.
(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
(vi) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.
(vii) A stabilizing brace or similar component.
(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that has any one of the following:
(i) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(ii) A pistol grip.
(iii) A fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds.
(iv) The ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(v) A forward grip.
(vi) A grenade launcher.
(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof.......


So, my Ruger 10/22 takedown is classified as an assault weapon because it has a threaded barrel. And because it's a takedown model. And my Walther P22 pistol also has a threaded barrel.

So both my .22lr guns are considered under this law more dangerous than my .357 magnum revolver? 10 rounds of .22lr is not more dangerous than 6 rounds of .357 magnum.

And my next gun will be a .357 magnum lever action rifle...also say more dangerous than my .22 semi-automatic.

The bill makes no sense in its criteria! If it looks scary, it's dangerous.
Click to expand...
Of course you saw the full list of firearms they want? Hi Point? Christ on crutches. Even the .22 I have,a EM1 .22 15 round and one of those shoulder thingy's that flip up. magazine ERMA-Werke
 
zsu2357 said:
Of course you saw the full list of firearms they want? Hi Point? Christ on crutches. Even the .22 I have,a EM1 .22 15 round and one of those shoulder thingy's that flip up. magazine ERMA-Werke
Click to expand...

I didn’t bother reading the list...the criteria alone were too depressing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom