Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night?

Quote:

so with that brilliant awakening , what do you propose to be done to stop all the gun deaths in which our country is the 1st world's leading nation in senseless gun deaths.

I propose to do nothing as I don't think the gun violence in the US is as bad as the anti-gun left make it out to be. I believe in the 2nd Amendment and it's claim of "Shall not be infringed", you know the only Amendment in the Constitution or Bill of Rights to have such a phrase.

so with that brilliant awakening , what do you propose to be done to stop all the gun deaths in which our country is the 1st world's leading nation in senseless gun deaths.

The old chestnut that says,
"what stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns",
has been shown to be total bullshit.

That's a dumb straw man argument. I'll leave it for you two to chase.

oralloy wrote:

You are the one who insists on outlawing them for no reason. How is that his obsession?

Because that's not what I insist on outlawing.

oralloy wrote:

You cannot provide any evidence that adding a pistol grip to a semi-auto weapon makes that weapon shoot more efficiently.

It's infered.

I'm not pressing to ban them.

oralloy wrote:

What you are wrongly referring to as an assault weapon is just an ordinary rifle with a pistol grip attached to it.

You are wrong.

oralloy wrote:

Your inference is factually incorrect.

How is it incorrect?

Call them whatever you want. How are they factually incorrect?

That is incorrect. They do improve efficiency.

Certain rifles with pistol grips, e.g. the AR-15 are human-hunting rifles.

There is justification for outlawing them.

It allows for the quicker pulling of the trigger.

With other variables being the same, a pistol grip allows for a more accurate aiming of the rifle.

It allows for the faster operation of the trigger by the shooter, and it allows for a more accurate aiming of the weapon.

Like I've said, it's inferred. Take it or leave it.

No, I haven't failed to produce anything. I've produced a conclusion based on inference.

Selective fire does not an assault rifle make, so to speak.

For now, we'll stick to assault weapons.

oralloy wrote:

That article was entirely about phobia of pistol grips.

Says you.

You are talking about ordinary weapons used for normal hunting of varmints and game animals. I'm talking about human-hunting rifles.

Just like the National Firearms Act wasn't an infringement,

the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act wasn't an infringement;

future regulations, restrictions and bans won't be infringements as well.

InfraBlue wrote:

That's a dumb straw man argument. I'll leave it for you two to chase.

You keep littering your posts with untrue accusations of straw man arguments against both me and Glennn, as well as making up your own fraudulent definitions of words and falsely accusing me of doing the same. It's getting to the point that the actual substantive points of contention are beginning to be buried in all of the noise that you are putting out.

Since everyone already understands that your static is untrue, I'm going to disregard it and focus on the actual substantive points of contention.

No one should take the fact that I am not addressing your false accusations as acceptance that they are true.

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:

You are the one who insists on outlawing them for no reason. How is that his obsession?

Because that's not what I insist on outlawing.

That is incorrect. When you demand a law that outlaws pistol grips, that is an attempt to outlaw pistol grips.

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:

You cannot provide any evidence that adding a pistol grip to a semi-auto weapon makes that weapon shoot more efficiently.

It's infered.

So in other words you cannot back up your claims.

InfraBlue wrote:

I'm not pressing to ban them.

That is incorrect. When you demand a law that outlaws pistol grips and AR-15 rifles, that is an attempt to outlaw pistol grips and AR-15 rifles.

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:

What you are wrongly referring to as an assault weapon is just an ordinary rifle with a pistol grip attached to it.

You are wrong.

No I'm not. What you are wrongly referring to as an assault weapon is just an ordinary hunting rifle with a pistol grip attached to it.

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:

Your inference is factually incorrect.

How is it incorrect?

Your inability to back up your claims shows that your claims are untrue.

InfraBlue wrote:

Call them whatever you want. How are they factually incorrect?

Your inability to back up your claims shows that your claims are untrue.

InfraBlue wrote:

That is incorrect. They do improve efficiency.

Nonsense. Let's see some evidence to prove that they increase efficiency.

InfraBlue wrote:

Certain rifles with pistol grips, e.g. the AR-15 are human-hunting rifles.

That is incorrect. Human-hunting rifles have full-auto or burst-fire capability.

InfraBlue wrote:

There is justification for outlawing them.

That is incorrect. There is no justification for outlawing ordinary hunting rifles.

InfraBlue wrote:

It allows for the quicker pulling of the trigger.

Nonsense. Let's see some evidence of this.

InfraBlue wrote:

With other variables being the same, a pistol grip allows for a more accurate aiming of the rifle.

And let's see some evidence of this as well.

It should also be noted that, even if you had been correct about pistol grips increasing accuracy, "being accurate" does not justify outlawing a rifle.

InfraBlue wrote:

It allows for the faster operation of the trigger by the shooter, and it allows for a more accurate aiming of the weapon.

Nonsense. How about some evidence to back up these claims?

Not to mention the fact that "being accurate" does not justify outlawing a rifle.

InfraBlue wrote:

Like I've said, it's inferred. Take it or leave it.

In other words, you are unable to back up your claims.

InfraBlue wrote:

No, I haven't failed to produce anything. I've produced a conclusion based on inference.

That is incorrect. You have failed to produce any evidence to back up your claims.

InfraBlue wrote:

oralloy wrote:

That article was entirely about phobia of pistol grips.

Says you.

I say it because it is true. Different people have different skills. I'm really skilled at pointing out facts.