Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Nuh-uh.

Wrong again. If you cannot demonstrate any relevance to this nonsense about obsolete battlefield weapons, then it is nothing more than irrelevant trivia.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
There are certain handguns and shotguns that are categorized as assault weapons as well.

That is incorrect. Assault weapons are effective at a range of 300 meters.
No handgun or shotgun is effective at that range.

According to who, you?

According to the definition of assault weapon.

Assault weapons:

a) are capable of either full-auto or burst-fire

b) accept detachable magazines

c) fire rounds that are less powerful than a standard deer rifle, and

d) are effective at a range of 300 meters.

This means that semi-auto-only guns are not assault weapons.

This means that guns with fixed magazines are not assault weapons.

This means that guns that fire rounds equal-to or greater-than the power of a standard deer rifle are not assault weapons.

This means that guns that fire handgun/shotgun/rimfire rounds are not assault weapons.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Exactly, according to you.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

No. According to the definition of "assault weapon".

1 Reply

@oralloy,

There are various definitions of the word "assault weapon." You're merely fixated on yours.

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

I'm merely adhering to the correct definition and disregarding all of the fraudulent definitions.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

There are various definitions of the word "assault weapon." You're merely fixated on yours.

Actually, you've become fixated on yours. Like I said, 43 States don't accept the new arbitrarily arrived at definition that you're clinging to.

You believe that the AR-15 is not an assault rifle, but that it is an assault weapon; or is it an assault style weapon? Tell me the difference between a rifle and a weapon, and then tell me the difference between an assault weapon and an assault style weapon. And then tell me the difference between an assault rifle and an assault style rifle.

And when you finish doing that, tell me when the Army started using assault style weapons or assault style rifles.

Someone else shied away from these questions. Let's see if you're up to it.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

"Correct" according to you.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
There are various definitions of the word "assault weapon." You're merely fixated on yours.

Actually, you've become fixated on yours. Like I said, 43 States don't accept the new arbitrarily arrived at definition that you're clinging to.

Actually, I'm pointing out the fact that there are other definitions of the word, the opinions of 43 states, according to you, notwithstanding.

Glenn wrote:

You believe that the AR-15 is not an assault rifle, but that it is an assault weapon; or is it an assault style weapon? Tell me the difference between a rifle and a weapon, and then tell me the difference between an assault weapon and an assault style weapon. And then tell me the difference between an assault rifle and an assault style rifle.

I'm going by the definition used in the Federal Assault Weapons Ban which refers to "assault weapons."

Glenn wrote:

And when you finish doing that, tell me when the Army started using assault style weapons or assault style rifles.

Someone else shied away from these questions. Let's see if you're up to it.

I'm not playing your red herring games.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

"Correct" according to you.

I'm just a fan of facts and reality.

It's the progressives who are always trying to use fraudulent definitions to pretend that words mean the opposite of what they really mean.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Actually, I'm pointing out the fact that there are other definitions of the word, the opinions of 43 states, according to you, notwithstanding.

Fraudulent definitions, cooked up by progressives to pretend that words mean the opposite of what they really mean.

InfraBlue wrote:

I'm going by the definition used in the Federal Assault Weapons Ban which refers to "assault weapons."

That's a fraudulent definition.

InfraBlue wrote:

I'm not playing your red herring games.

All he did was ask you to justify your definitions. Such a request is neither a red herring nor a game.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

The weapon was created for our military to travel lighter and be able to carry more ammo.

You were in the Army Snood, would have carried an AR15 into Iraq or Afghanistan?

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

There is a point in indicating that the M1 Garand was a battlefield weapon and that assault weapons such as the AR-15 are based on it, and that they are highly efficient killing instruments.

There is actually nothing in common between the M1 and the AR15.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Yes there is.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

No there isn't, take a part each of those guns and they don't have any parts in common except a trigger. Their internal components are different and work differently.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Actually, I'm pointing out the fact that there are other definitions of the word, the opinions of 43 states, according to you, notwithstanding.

Fraudulent definitions, cooked up by progressives to pretend that words mean the opposite of what they really mean.

Question begging based on opinion illustrates the fact that you are wrong.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
I'm going by the definition used in the Federal Assault Weapons Ban which refers to "assault weapons."

That's a fraudulent definition.

Redundancy yet again.

InfraBlue wrote:

I'm not playing your red herring games.

All he did was ask you to justify your definitions.[/quote]

Such a request is neither a red herring nor a game.
[/quote]

He is mischaracterizing the definitions I've presented, and creating a red herring argument therefrom with his request.

3 Replies

@InfraBlue,

These are the idiots who are writing and changing the gun laws. Just like a majority of leftists on this page, they don't know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to guns. They only rely on misinformation and lies to spread their propaganda.
https://thepeoplesledger.com/congresswoman-writing-gun-legislation-lies-to-reporters-also-proves-she-is-completely-clueless-about-them/?fbclid=IwAR1OoGIlI_B_NhQDxOVgFEoFpw73UHe_6phAOS2OgZtejYAoPIZq8vxfYck#utm_source=5%20Bravo

Quote:

Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee recently spoke during an event to get the House to “flood” the Senate, claiming that the AR-15 is a heavy weapon that fires .50 caliber ammunition.

“I’ve held an AR-15 in my hand, I wish I hadn’t,” she told media. “It is as heavy as 10 boxes that you might be moving and the bullet that is utilized, a .50 caliber, these kinds of bullets, need to be licensed and do not need to be on the street.”

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

No there isn't, take a part each of those guns and they don't have any parts in common except a trigger. Their internal components are different and work differently.

Variations of the M1 Garand featured a folding stock and pistol grip.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Those are cosmetic features and have nothing to do with how the gun actually works. So my comment stands, take those guns apart and look at their parts, nothing in common but a trigger.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Did she have a hand in writing the Federal Assault Weapons Ban?

1 Reply

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know