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

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

total bullshit red herring.

The bazookas? Not at all. If you refer to something else, you will need to be more clear what you mean.

MontereyJack wrote:

a militia member in the 18th century couldn't hitch up his plow mule and take a cannon home with him along with his musket.

He could if it was his own cannon. Ownership of black powder artillery has never been restricted in America.

A bazooka is not even remotely comparable to a cannon in any case. Bazookas are carried and operated by individual infantrymen. Cannons are heavy weapons operated by a crew from a fixed position. A machine gun nest is a much more apt comparison to a cannon emplacement.

So, if you succeed in bringing back the militia, I will have the right to buy a closet full of 84mm bazookas.

If any bad guys try to attack me, body armor won't do them any good at all. One hit from an 84mm bazooka and I'll have to hire a cleaning service to sponge chunks of bad guy off my walls and ceiling. Mr. Green

I'll have to remember to buy the versions that can be fired indoors....

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

That would be theft of govt property, but there was nothing to prevent people from owning their own cannons, if you could afford one, you could own one. Today, you can own these types of weapons, to include tanks and other types of heavy weapons.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

You can own a tank but they will completely disable the weapons system befoke you get it, which basically means you'll have an extraordinarily heavy, very inefficient bulldozer. Enjoy destroying the roads where you live, that's all you could do with it.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

If you properly register the weapons, you can legally have a tank with all of its weapons fully active.

Are you sure you don't want to pursue the militia aspects of the Second Amendment?

I'd really like to buy those bazookas. Just think of the stopping power and the armor penetration.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

That wasn't what you implied though. People could own cannons and people can own cannons today. They can also own tanks, doesn't matter if the gun works or not, you can still own one. You have been proven wrong on this and other claims on guns and weapons.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

No it's not.

That is incorrect. Claiming that a semi-auto-only weapon "is a weapon of assault" is a falsehood.

InfraBlue wrote:

Outlawing AR-15 assault weapons

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

InfraBlue wrote:

is not a violation of people's civil liberties at all.

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are a violation of that civil liberty.

InfraBlue wrote:

Outlawing AR-15 assault weapons

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

InfraBlue wrote:

is not a violation of the Second Amendment.

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are a violation of that civil liberty.

InfraBlue wrote:

No he's not.

That is incorrect. When Mr. Biden says that he is not doing something, while he is actually doing it as he speaks, he is lying.

It's like Harvey Weinstein saying that he isn't a rapist while he is raping someone.

InfraBlue wrote:

There is nothing unreasonable about,

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

InfraBlue wrote:

or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating.

Outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto rifles is a violation of people's civil liberties.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:
No it's not.

That is incorrect. Claiming that a semi-auto-only weapon "is a weapon of assault" is a falsehood.

Wrong. It is neither incorrect nor a falsehood.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Outlawing AR-15 assault weapons

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

The AR-15 is in every way an assault weapon.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
is not a violation of people's civil liberties at all.

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are a violation of that civil liberty.

Possibly, but it is not a violation of people's civil liberties at all. Your assertion is irrelevant.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Outlawing AR-15 assault weapons

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

AR-15 carbines and rifles are in every way assault weapons. As such their outlawing was not and would not be a violation of people's civil liberties at all.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
is not a violation of the Second Amendment.

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are a violation of that civil liberty.

Possibly, but it is not a violation of people's civil liberties at all. Your assertion is irrelevant.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
No he's not.

That is incorrect. When Mr. Biden says that he is not doing something, while he is actually doing it as he speaks, he is lying.

Wrong. Biden is not lying when he says that he is not trying to violate people's civil liberties.

oralloy wrote:

It's like Harvey Weinstein saying that he isn't a rapist while he is raping someone.

Wrong. That is a false analogy. Reasonable gun control is one thing; rape is entirely another thing.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
There is nothing unreasonable about,

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

Possibly, but there is nothing unreasonable about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating. This assertion of yours is irrelevant as well.

oralloy wrote:

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

There is nothing unreasonable nor non-common sensical about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating.

oralloy wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating.

Outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto rifles is a violation of people's civil liberties.

Possibly, but there has been, and will be nothing in opposition to civil liberties in the gun control that Biden is advocating. This assertion of yours is irrelevant as well.

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

The AR-15 is in every way an assault weapon.

Oh how soon you forget. The AR-15 is not an assault weapon. It is not a select-fire rifle. That's why the military does not use the civilian version; it doesn't suit their needs; they want select-fire weapons, not semiautomatic rifles.

Now I'm pretty sure that you are going to go on and on about how the pistol-grip, flash suppressor, or barrel-shroud makes a rifle especially dangerous. And you can be sure that I will remind you over and over again that that is not true. And you will continue to push that point. And I will continue to remind you that you have absolutely no proof of your false claim. And you will claim that, despite having nothing at all to make your case, it is nonetheless true. And we will do that 'til the cows come home.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
The AR-15 is in every way an assault weapon.

Oh how soon you forget. The AR-15 is not an assault weapon. It is not a select-fire rifle. That's why the military does not use the civilian version; it doesn't suit their needs; they want select-fire weapons, not semiautomatic rifles.

You're confusing assault rifles with assault weapons.

Glennn wrote:

Now I'm pretty sure that you are going to go on and on about how the pistol-grip, flash suppressor, or barrel-shroud makes a rifle especially dangerous. And you can be sure that I will remind you over and over again that that is not true. And you will continue to push that point. And I will continue to remind you that you have absolutely no proof of your false claim. And you will claim that, despite having nothing at all to make your case, it is nonetheless true. And we will do that 'til the cows come home.

So, stop before you carry it further.

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

No confusion. They are interchangeable terms for the same thing.

And they've been highly restricted for 85 years now.

People are only allowed to own them, even under those tight restrictions, if they were manufactured and registered more than 33 years ago.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

A claim that a semi-auto-only rifle "is a weapon of assault" is both incorrect and a falsehood.

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are violations of that civil liberty.

"That unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are violations of that civil liberty" is highly relevant to the question of "whether your proposed unjustifiable restrictions violate civil liberties."

When Mr. Biden says that he is not doing something, while he is actually doing it as he speaks, he is lying. It's like Harvey Weinstein saying that he isn't a rapist while he is raping someone.

The fact that rape and civil liberties violations are two different things does not minimize the audacity of Biden saying that he is not doing something right while he is actually doing it.

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

"That it is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure" is highly relevant to "your untrue claim that his actions are reasonable."

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

No confusion. They are interchangeable terms for the same thing.

Much confusion. No they're not.

oralloy wrote:

And they've been highly restricted for 85 years now.

People are only allowed to own them, even under those tight restrictions, if they were manufactured and registered more than 33 years ago.

Machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934. The manufacture of assault weapons was prohibited for ten years under the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Much confusion. No they're not.

No confusion on my end.

And no. Both terms refer to exactly the same thing: weapons that have been tightly restricted for a very long time now.

InfraBlue wrote:

Machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934.

Those same regulations have always covered assault weapons.

InfraBlue wrote:

The manufacture of assault weapons was prohibited for ten years under the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994.

That law unconstitutionally prohibited the manufacture of ordinary hunting rifles. It did not address assault weapons in any way.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

A claim that a semi-auto-only rifle "is a weapon of assault" is both incorrect and a falsehood.

Certain semiautomatic rifles, e.g. the AR-15, are assault weapons.

oralloy wrote:

Semi-auto-only rifles are not in any way assault weapons.

AR-15s are, in every way definable, assault weapons.

oralloy wrote:

Unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are violations of that civil liberty.

Agreed.

oralloy wrote:

"That unjustifiable restrictions on a civil liberty are violations of that civil liberty" is highly relevant to the question of "whether your proposed unjustifiable restrictions violate civil liberties."

This, as well, is irrelevant to the banning of AR-15 rifles.

oralloy wrote:

When Mr. Biden says that he is not doing something, while he is actually doing it as he speaks, he is lying. It's like Harvey Weinstein saying that he isn't a rapist while he is raping someone.

Sure, but not when he is doing something and not saying he is doing something else.

oralloy wrote:

The fact that rape and civil liberties violations are two different things does not minimize the audacity of Biden saying that he is not doing something right while he is actually doing it.

In this case, he isn't doing that.

oralloy wrote:

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

There is nothing unreasonable nor non-common sensical about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating.

oralloy wrote:

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

Possibly, but there is nothing unreasonable about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating. This assertion of yours is irrelevant as well.

oralloy wrote:

"That it is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure" is highly relevant to "your untrue claim that his actions are reasonable."

Where did I say, "your untrue claim that his actions are reasonable"?

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Assault weapons have selective fire. Semi-auto-only AR-15 rifles fail that requirement.

The fact that the banning of semi-auto-only AR-15 rifles violates people's civil liberties is highly relevant.

Biden is trying to violate the Second Amendment. That is exactly what he claims he is not doing.

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

The fact that Mr. Biden's proposal is an unjustifiable restriction on the Second Amendment means that it violates the Second Amendment.

"That it is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure" is highly relevant to "your untrue claim that his actions are reasonable."

Your exact words when you wrongly claimed that Biden's actions are reasonable were "there is nothing unreasonable about".

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Assault weapons have selective fire. Semi-auto-only AR-15 rifles fail that requirement.

Wrong. Assault weapons have semiautomatic fire, among other features.

oralloy wrote:

The fact that the banning of semi-auto-only AR-15 rifles violates people's civil liberties is highly relevant.

That is neither a fact, nor is it relevant at all.

oralloy wrote:

Biden is trying to violate the Second Amendment. That is exactly what he claims he is not doing.

Wrong. Biden is doing nothing of the sort.

oralloy wrote:

It is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure.

Possibly, but there is nothing unreasonable about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating. This assertion of yours is irrelevant as well.

oralloy wrote:

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

There is nothing unreasonable nor non-common sensical about, or in opposition to civil liberties in, the gun control that Biden is advocating.

oralloy wrote:

The fact that Mr. Biden's proposal is an unjustifiable restriction on the Second Amendment means that it violates the Second Amendment.

Outlawing AR-15 assault weapons is not a violation of the Second Amendment.

oralloy wrote:

"That it is unreasonable for Mr. Biden to violate people's civil liberties for his own sadistic pleasure" is highly relevant to "your untrue claim that his actions are reasonable."

Your exact words when you wrongly claimed that Biden's actions are reasonable were "there is nothing unreasonable about".

That's incorrect. There is nothing unreasonable about the gun control that Biden is advocating.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Assault weapons have selective fire capability.

Semi-auto-only AR-15 rifles are not assault weapons, as they lack selective fire capability.

It is a fact that banning semi-auto only AR-15 rifles without any justification violates the Second Amendment.

The fact that banning semi-auto only AR-15 rifles without any justification violates the Second Amendment is highly relevant.

Biden is trying to violate the Second Amendment when he pushes unjustified restrictions on it.

It is unreasonable for Biden to try to violate the Second Amendment solely for his own sadistic pleasure over violating people's civil liberties.

The fact that Biden is trying to violate the Second Amendment, and is trying to do so solely for his own sadistic pleasure over violating people's rights, is highly relevant.

It never fails that people who oppose civil liberties invoke terms like reason and common sense.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

You're confusing assault rifles with assault weapons.

Oh? So tell me the difference between a weapon and a rifle.

Quote:

So, stop before you carry it further.

I'm not going to carry it further; you are. You're going to claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. And I'm going to ask you to support that ridiculous claim. And, just like before, you're going to claim that you could if you wanted to, but that you don't want to. And then you're going to continue talking as if you did support your ridiculous claim.

Quote:

Wrong. Assault weapons have semiautomatic fire, among other features.

More silliness. Civilian rifles don't have select-fire. That's why the military does not use them; they're not assault weapons. Go ahead and ignore that fact, and I will bring you back to it every time.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Nope.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
You're confusing assault rifles with assault weapons.

Oh? So tell me the difference between a weapon and a rifle.

The difference is between "assault rifles" and "assault weapons."

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
So, stop before you carry it further.

I'm not going to carry it further; you are. You're going to claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. And I'm going to ask you to support that ridiculous claim. And, just like before, you're going to claim that you could if you wanted to, but that you don't want to. And then you're going to continue talking as if you did support your ridiculous claim.

You brought it up; I didn't.

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
Wrong. Assault weapons have semiautomatic fire, among other features.

More silliness. Civilian rifles don't have select-fire. That's why the military does not use them; they're not assault weapons. Go ahead and ignore that fact, and I will bring you back to it every time.

Who anything about select-fire? More straw man arguments that you bring yourself back to because that's all you have.

2 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know