Let's talk about guns. . . . . .

Bagginski said:

A weapon that is capable of burst-fire and/or full-auto-fire.

Semi-automatics are not able to fire bursts or continuously, so they can’t be assault weapons: assault requires the firepower, it’s why the capacity exists. A semi-auto is not a capable battle rifle because it is single-shot. It may be self-cocking and self-reloading, but it is not capable of the rapid rate of fire that field combat use demands.

Yes, that means there are NO semiautomatic assault rifles, no matter *what* they look like.

Click to expand...

AMEN Brother. I tell idiots the same thing all the time.

Bagginski said:

True enough, and it’s always appropriate to remind people that bullshit really is bullshit.

Best way I know is with a strict, technically-accurate, easy-to-grasp description.

Click to expand...

Wait for it, they will reply back with the same dumb response.

Retrumplicans have become a death cult and don't value human life.

You're limited to 5 rounds in your hunting rifle here

Bagginski said:

A weapon that is capable of burst-fire and/or full-auto-fire.

Semi-automatics are not able to fire bursts or continuously, so they can’t be assault weapons: assault requires the firepower, it’s why the capacity exists. A semi-auto is not a capable battle rifle because it is single-shot. It may be self-cocking and self-reloading, but it is not capable of the rapid rate of fire that field combat use demands.

Yes, that means there are NO semiautomatic assault rifles, no matter *what* they look like.

Click to expand...

I love my Mini-14.....

doublejj said:

I love my Mini-14.....
View attachment 4778114

Click to expand...

A banjo pick and proper sized , stout compression spring are easier. Dad was a fanatic. Like plinking cans only. Peace a best wishes.

Who cares how fast you can shoot if you aren't hitting what you are shooting at. Especially with ammo prices and availability being what they are.

Renfro said:

Who cares how fast you can shoot if you aren't hitting what you are shooting at. Especially with ammo prices and availability being what they are.

Click to expand...

Only cause it is you. Happy holidays. Force equalization and crowd suppression come to mind. Pointless beyond look at what I can do.

Where’s the freedom in ending someone’s life with a bullet?

zeddd said:

Where’s the freedom in ending someone’s life with a bullet?

Click to expand...

the firing pin.

madvillian420 said:

the firing pin.

Click to expand...

That made absolutely no sense.

madvillian420 said:

the firing pin.

Click to expand...

Fair question, silly answer

its actually a retarded question

zeddd said:

Where’s the freedom in ending someone’s life with a bullet?

Click to expand...

What if it's your own?

Sir Napsalot said:

What if it's your own?

Click to expand...

Another good reason to reform gunz law, I think free healthcare should be available to all, mental health crises need medical intervention not guns to off the suicidal.
America is looking very backward compared to many European countries, the fact that this thread exists is a testament to the atavism present in the right wing ideology of Trumpism.
Joe is going to take your fucking guns.

madvillian420 said:

its actually a retarded question

Click to expand...

How so dumbass?

Bagginski said:

A weapon that is capable of burst-fire and/or full-auto-fire.

Semi-automatics are not able to fire bursts or continuously, so they can’t be assault weapons: assault requires the firepower, it’s why the capacity exists. A semi-auto is not a capable battle rifle because it is single-shot. It may be self-cocking and self-reloading, but it is not capable of the rapid rate of fire that field combat use demands.

Yes, that means there are NO semiautomatic assault rifles, no matter *what* they look like.

Click to expand...

I think it’s in the eye of the beholder lol. I collect guns and do occasionally hunt (it was a passion for many years but I’ve lost the urge). The issue IMO is not wether it’s an assault rifle or hunting or a target shooting weapon. In the hands of a untrained, brainless, or mentally disturbed person any firearm is dangerous with the sole purpose being to kill. The US has devolved into a mutual destruction mentality with firearms. Yes there needs to be a semblance of control, no not everyone has the right to own them, it, like a car, carries responsibility that should be earned.

Budley Doright said:

Yes there needs to be a semblance of control, no not everyone has the right to own them,

Click to expand...

Everyone has the right to own and use the means to protect themselves from people who initiate aggression against them.

It's true, not everyone will use guns in a defensive way against other humans, which is the ONLY acceptable way to use them in that realm.
Your idea falls into that category, since it "authorizes" the use of offensive force in order to try to prevent offensive force. Lame.

For instance, to implement your fantasy of "responsible gun control" you'd have to use or threaten to use guns in an offensive force manner in order to take them, or force registration etc. against otherwise peaceful people who own guns for defensive purposes. You are an authority worshipper and make an exemption for some people (the people you worship and obey) to have more rights than others.

Your silly idea is self contradicting, an illogical failure and reeks of a master / slave mindset.