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

@InfraBlue,

Nope. No strawman arguments from me. You're merely being redundantly cagey.

Just slow down and give your definition of an assault rifle, as apposed to an assault weapon. Then make a statement one way or the other as to whether or not a pistol grip enters the equation.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

I've already defined it for you here quite some time ago.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Good. Now we're making some headway.

"A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon."

So now that we've established that you believe that folding stocks and pistol grips increase the lethality of a semiautomatic rifle, you need to follow up that belief with reference to tests or studies that would confirm your belief.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Look up pistol grip rifles.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

I didn't ask you for the definition of a pistol grip.

You believe that folding stocks and pistol grips increase the lethality of a semiautomatic rifles. You need to follow up that belief with a reference to the tests or studies that would validate that belief. I'll make it even easier for you. Just produce some comment from a law enforcement figure saying something to the effect of: "If it weren't for the folding stock on the AR-15, lives would have been saved." The same goes for pistol grips.

So, got anything or not?

2 Replies

@Glennn,

More red herrings from glenn. AR-15s are designed to be light and compact easy to carry anduse efficiently, and able to fire many bullets very quickly and able to accommodate huge ammounts of additional bullets. They've been produced in large nmbers and are allegedly the most popular long weapon sales-wise, and they're becoming th weapon of choice for mass murderers because they do an efficient job of commttigh mass murder. They are clearly lethal enough as they stand. No further tests or documentation are needed to recognize that. That is why there is a compelling need for government to start trying to reduce gun violence by banning them. I emphasize START because if that doesn't produce sufficient reduction in gun deaths, the public and elected officials that want to stay in office will demand further action until deaths from gun violence go down..

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

More red herrings from glenn.

No red herrings. When you try to ban pistol grips on ordinary hunting rifles, it is entirely on topic to criticize you for this.

MontereyJack wrote:

AR-15s are designed to be light and compact easy to carry and use efficiently, and able to fire many bullets very quickly and able to accommodate huge amounts of additional bullets.

No they aren't. The semi-auto-only versions are just ordinary hunting rifles.

The number of bullets is related to the magazine, not to the gun.

MontereyJack wrote:

they're becoming the weapon of choice for mass murderers

No they aren't. Mass murderers prefer handguns.

MontereyJack wrote:

They are clearly lethal enough as they stand.

No more lethal than any other rifle that is suitable for self defense.

MontereyJack wrote:

That is why there is a compelling need for government to start trying to reduce gun violence by banning them.

Banning ordinary hunting rifles would not do anything to reduce any violence.

MontereyJack wrote:

I emphasize START because if that doesn't produce sufficient reduction in gun deaths, the public and elected officials that want to stay in office will demand further action until deaths from gun violence go down..

You can make whatever empty demands you like.

You're not going to get any new gun laws at all.

No soup for you.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The semi-auto-only versions are just ordinary hunting rifle

wrong, theyve been given such a name as, "Modern Sporting Rifles"to divert our eyes from what they really are.

Quote:

The number of bullets is related to the magazine, not to the gun.

The clip bone connected to thereceiver bone. I have a .228 "Modern Sporting Rifle" That hs the same serial on the mag a does the gun.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

Did you see the video I added when the guy is swapping a Ruger Ranch Rifle between a wooden stock and a plastic stock? What the different between the rifle being in a wooden vs plastic stock, it's still the same weapon, one looks scary and one doesn't.

Quote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J29rdeeDSYk

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Not wrong. The semi-auto-only versions are ordinary hunting rifles.

And ammo capacity is related to the magazine, not to the gun.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

I was suggesting that you look up explanations for pistol grips on rifles, not definitions. Your fellow gun psychos have a lot of websites that will explain it to you.

Why law enforcement? These features were implemented by the military in their rifles to make them more effective at killing the enemy, i.e. more lethal. They were not implemented for cosmetic or stylistic purposes. I'm sure the military has studies about their effectiveness, otherwise they wouldn't have been implemented. It's difficult acquiring these studies, though.

3 Replies

@Baldimo,

do they both have a banana clip or drum mag?. Does the ranch gun even receive high cap magazines???
Ill look at your video.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

No further tests or documentation are needed to recognize that.

What in hell do you mean "no further tests are needed?" There were no initial tests to begin with. But do keep going. Like others here, you're doing a fine job of demonstrating the groundless mindset of anti-gun nuts.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Does the ranch gun even receive high cap magazines???

ANY gun that can receive detachable magazines, can receive high capacity magazines.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

These features were implemented by the military in their rifles to make them more effective at killing the enemy, i.e. more lethal.

You would be wrong. The doctrine in using the M16, wasn't to kill the enemy, it was to badly injure the enemy. The battle doctrine goes like this: You kill one enemy, the rest of them keep fighting, if you badly injure an enemy, then you take several other fighters out of the fight to take care of their fellow fighter. This is what is actually taught in the Army and part of the reason for going with a smaller lighter bullet. Larger heavier bullets actually cause more death than lighter bullets. Just about everything the left says about the AR15 is a complete lie based on a complete lack of knowledge.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

These features were implemented by the military in their rifles to make them more effective at killing the enemy, i.e. more lethal. They were not implemented for cosmetic or stylistic purposes. I'm sure the military has studies about their effectiveness, otherwise they wouldn't have been implemented.

Can you produce any of these studies, or are you unable to back up your claims about their lethality?

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

wrong, theyve been given such a name as, "Modern Sporting Rifles"to divert our eyes from what they really are.

Wrong! They've been given such names as "assault weapon" to divert your attention from what they really are.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

I'm referring to these features that were implemented in the M1 Garand used in WWII.

I think they were incorporated into versions used in the Korean War.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

I was suggesting that you look up explanations for pistol grips on rifles

They're an ergonomic improvement. They're more comfortable. But anti-gun nuts want to push the idea that that comfort translates to increased deadliness. That's simple hysterics, as there is nothing to support that idea.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Can you produce any of these studies, or are you unable to back up your claims about their lethality?

I'd like to field that question.

No, he cannot produce such a thing.

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know