NRA trains members to attack enemies without mercy

parados wrote:

The differences between your average deer rifle and an assault rifle are not merely cosmetic in nature. They affect the way the weapon handles and can be used. An assualt rifle is designed to be controlled while fired on full automatic or controlled when fired from positions other than the shoulder. This information was on the first site I gave in answering the "reasonable" definition question.

Just changing a deer rifle to fully automatic will not give it the same effectiveness as a fully automatic assualt rifle. When a weapon is fired it recoils. An assault rifle is designed to reduce this recoil and allow the user better control to keep the barrel pointed at the target.

True. A pistol grip and/or something to insulate you from the barrel. These can be purchased and/or made quite easily for many hunting rifles. Likewise; they can be removed from an AK just as easily.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

The differences between your average deer rifle and an assault rifle are not merely cosmetic in nature. They affect the way the weapon handles and can be used. An assualt rifle is designed to be controlled while fired on full automatic or controlled when fired from positions other than the shoulder. This information was on the first site I gave in answering the "reasonable" definition question.

Just changing a deer rifle to fully automatic will not give it the same effectiveness as a fully automatic assualt rifle. When a weapon is fired it recoils. An assault rifle is designed to reduce this recoil and allow the user better control to keep the barrel pointed at the target.

1) No one is talking about fully automatic rifles. They are illegal unless you get a special permit and go through rigerous background checks and give up several of your privacy rights. Everyone here agrees that fully automatic rifles are probably the only good definition of an 'assult' rifle. You don't need to make any more points against them.

2) ALL guns are designed to reduce recoil. EVERY ONE OF THEM! No gun manufacturer is going to make a mass-marketable gun without trying to reduce recoil to the lowest levels possible for that model of gun.

3) Where are you getting your information that a semi-automatic assult rifle is designed to be fired from the hip (maybe another link that supports this claim)? WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD FIRE FROM THE HIP? Because they did this in Rambo you think it's real?

0 Replies

Quote:

The differences between your average deer rifle and an assault rifle are not merely cosmetic in nature. They affect the way the weapon handles and can be used. An assualt rifle is designed to be controlled while fired on full automatic or controlled when fired from positions other than the shoulder. This information was on the first site I gave in answering the "reasonable" definition question.

Would you consider the weapon that the US military uses (M16A2) to be an assault rifle?

It isn't. It has 2 modes of fire. Semiauto which shoots as fast as you pull the trigger and Burst which is a 3 round burst. Civilian models don't have a burst option only the Semiauto. This doesn't fall under your description of an assault weapon. Its looks would lead you to beleive that it is one but it isn't. I don't see an issue with hunters using the civilian model of the M16 when hunting because they can't put it on "full auto" and blast away.

0 Replies

baldimo

Quote:

Civilian models don't have a burst option only the Semiauto.

. But the conversion kits are all over the map. The basic frames of the guns are the same and a reasonably adept gun enthusiast can convert to full auto with help from the gun mfr who made the weapon.

0 Replies

That video was not converting a hunting rifle to an assault rifle. It was taking parts from a hunting rifle and putting them in an assault rifle.
There was no conversion because the parts were pretty substantial.

I could make a video that shows me taking the steering wheel from a camero, removing all the parts but the steering wheel and then bringing in parts to put around that steering wheel to create an 18 wheeler. It doesn't make a camero essentially the same thing as an 18 wheeler. It only shows they have some of the same parts. Its nothing more than a simple magician's trick using misdirection.

Baldi, The M16 is an assault rifle. "Assault" rifle has little or nothing to do with the mode of fire. It has components that make it one.

1 Reply

What is truly hilarious in all of this hair-splitting about assault rifles (and CJ attempting to claim there ain't no such a thing) is that the term was apparently, understood by all in the Zumbo flap. Zumbo, and those among the gun crowd lunatic fringe who went ballistic over his remark--they all seemed to have understood what the term means and that there is such a thing. Yet, we have page after page of people quibbling over the term, and either attempting to suggest that there is no significant difference between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle, or that assault rifles don't in fact exist.

Hilarious, marvelously hilarious . . .

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

What is truly hilarious in all of this hair-splitting about assault rifles (and CJ attempting to claim there ain't no such a thing) is that the term was apparently, understood by all in the Zumbo flap. Zumbo, and those among the gun crowd lunatic fringe who went ballistic over his remark--they all seemed to have understood what the term means and that there is such a thing. Yet, we have page after page of people quibbling over the term, and either attempting to suggest that there is no significant difference between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle, or that assault rifles don't in fact exist.

Hilarious, marvelously hilarious . . .

Marvelously hilarious that you are completly missing the point of the last several pages.

Who is saying that there isn't a significant difference. An assult rifle is fully automatic. A hunting rifle is semi-automatic. Semi-automatic rifles are not assult rifles. Of course assult rifles exist, the M16 used by the military is an assult rifle, the AK-47, when fully automatic is an assult rifle.

Some semi-automatic rifles LOOK like fully automatic assult rifles, and that is where the topic is currently at. There are significant and extreme differences between a fully automatic rifle and a semi automatic rifle. So much so that to own a fully automatic rifle you must forego or give up some of your privacy rights to even own one. If you break this law I believe there is up to a 10 year jail sentence and/or a $250,000 fine. You get less time for rape.

The 'hair-splitting' is coming from your side Set.

The side I'm on pretty much agrees that a fully automatic rifle is an assult rifle. A semi-automatic is not.

Your side seems to think that by adding a knife to the end of the barrel, or putting a barrel shroud on your hunting rifle makes it one too, but you can have a knife on the end if you forego the barrel shroud, or you can have a pistol grip, but then you can't have a knife, or you can have a 10 round mag, but not an 11,.......seems like you're doing the hair splitting.

When asked to explain the differences between a rifle and an assult rifle your side pulled out an expired law that only continues to split hairs. Then you accuse my side of doing the same....pretty inconsistent.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

baldimo
Quote:
Civilian models don't have a burst option only the Semiauto.
. But the conversion kits are all over the map. The basic frames of the guns are the same and a reasonably adept gun enthusiast can convert to full auto with help from the gun mfr who made the weapon.

'A resonably adept gun enthusiast' WITH THE PROPER LEGAL PAPERWORK.

You do understand that gun owners and enthusiasts are pretty much a 'by the book' crowd don't you. You understand that the penalty's for doing something like this illegally are EXTREME. If you commit a crime with a class III weapon (anything that is capable of firing more than 1 shot with each pull of the trigger) it is an addition to your prison sentence of up to 30 years.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

"Assault" rifle has little or nothing to do with the mode of fire. It has components that make it one.

Then please explain what these components are that have nothing to do with the mode of fire.

0 Replies

I'm not on a "side," Maporsche, but am unsurprised to see you characterizing me, or anyone else, in terms of taking a side.

The original story of the thread speaks of a man who objected that there was no reason to use assault rifles for hunting:

Quote:

Zumbo's fame, however, has turned to black-bordered infamy within America's gun culture -- and his multimedia success has come undone. It all happened in the past week, after he publicly criticized the use of military-style assault rifles by hunters, especially those gunning for prairie dogs.

"Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity," Zumbo wrote in his blog on the Outdoor Life Web site. The Feb. 16 posting has since been taken down. "As hunters, we don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them. . . . I'll go so far as to call them 'terrorist' rifles."

No one concerned, neither Zumbo nor the NRA, had any doubt about the weapons referred to.

I am amused to see that the last several pages have been devoted to an attempt to suggest that the definition of assault rifle is problematic and uncertain, when it is clear that no such uncertainty troubled Zumbo or the NRA.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

I'm not on a "side," Maporsche, but am unsurprised to see you characterizing me, or anyone else, in terms of taking a side.

The original story of the thread speaks of a man who objected that there was no reason to use assault rifles for hunting:

Quote:
Zumbo's fame, however, has turned to black-bordered infamy within America's gun culture -- and his multimedia success has come undone. It all happened in the past week, after he publicly criticized the use of military-style assault rifles by hunters, especially those gunning for prairie dogs.

"Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity," Zumbo wrote in his blog on the Outdoor Life Web site. The Feb. 16 posting has since been taken down. "As hunters, we don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them. . . . I'll go so far as to call them 'terrorist' rifles."

No one concerned, neither Zumbo nor the NRA, had any doubt about the weapons referred to.

I am amused to see that the last several pages have been devoted to an attempt to suggest that the definition of assault rifle is problematic and uncertain, when it is clear that no such uncertainty troubled Zumbo or the NRA.

I'm sure he was referring to a fully automatic assult rifle, such as the M16 or a modified AK47.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

An assult rifle is fully automatic. A hunting rifle is semi-automatic. Semi-automatic rifles are not assult rifles.

maporsche then wrote:

You do understand that gun owners and enthusiasts are pretty much a 'by the book' crowd don't you.

and finally, maporsche wrote:

I'm sure he was referring to a fully automatic assult rifle, such as the M16 or a modified AK47.

This doesn't make any sense. If all assault rifles are fully automatic, and gun enthusiasts are a "by the book" bunch of people, and Zumbo was referring solely to fully automatics when he said that assault rifles have no place in hunting, then there shouldn't have been any fuss. After all, if fully automatics are illegal and gun enthusiasts are all "by the book," then none of those gun enthusiasts would have been hunting with a fully automatic and they all would have wholeheartedly agreed with Zumbo.

And yet they didn't.

Is that because Zumbo's critics understood him to include semi-automatic rifles under the rubric of "military-style assault rifle," just as congress did when it defined semi-automatic rifles as "assault weapons?" That makes a whole lot more sense, considering that it would have been silly on Zumbo's part to criticize hunters for shooting prairie dogs with fully automatic weapons when such weapons are banned and gun enthusiasts are so "by the book." The alternative -- a bunch of gun nuts out there on the prairies machine-gunning rodents --is just too monstrous to contemplate.

If we are to believe maporsche, Zumbo was aiming at a non-existent target: the law-breaking gun enthusiast who hunts with a banned fully automatic weapon. I think it is more plausible to believe that Zumbo's critics understood him perfectly well, and knew that Zumbo was talking about semi-automatics when he talked of "military-style assault rifles."

0 Replies

Well, I just read Zumbo's apology and it does appear that he was talking about semi-automatic rifles, he named the AR15 specifically in his apology. He incorrectly used the term 'assult rifle', and I think most of the ferver that surrounded his statement came from pro-gun people understanding that his words would be used by anti-gun people across America.

My purpose of posting in this thread has been to educate you (not specifically you, but you in general) that an assult rifle, as defined by most of the anti-gun crowd, and those ignorant in the pro-gun crowd, is not significantly different than any other rifle, and those specific items that make a rifle an 'assult rifle' by the Congress' expired definition do not make sense.

In the ignorant sense and worldview an assult rifle is defined by it's look. 'Military style' is commonly used to describe an assult rifle as we've seen in this post. You've also seen several attempts to challenge this viewpoint that in my eyes have not been fully answered or thought-through. Several comments have been made along the lines 'Congress passed this law that says what one is so the issue has been settled'.

In the more educated sense it is understood that a semi-automatic military style rifle is NOT the same as a fully automatic rifle and IS the same as any other semi-automatic rifle.

Here is a wikipedia definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
[quote]Examples of assault rifles include the M16 rifle and the AK-47. Semi-automatic rifles, including commercial versions of the AR-15, and "automatic" rifles limited to firing single shots are not assault rifles as they are not selective fire.[/quote]

Here is a Britannica Encyclopedia definition.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9009921/assault-rifle

Quote:

military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and that has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire. Because they are light and portable yet still able to deliver a high volume of fire with reasonable accuracy at modern combat ranges of 300-500 m (1,000-1,600 feet), assault rifles have replaced the high-powered

0 Replies

And Joe, fully automatic weapons are legal, you can buy one if you like, you just have to go through a pretty long legal process to get a permit. Do you even read what I post, I've said this several times. Fully automatic weapons ARE legal WITH the right paperwork.

You're right though, Zumbo was talking to a pretty non-existent target. Here is part of his apology:

Quote:

I saw one "black" firearm in a hunting camp in all my 50 years of hunting

0 Replies

What the above quoted britannica article said:

Quote:

In those countries where assault rifles can be purchased in the civilian market, their sale is subject to various restrictions, such as the elimination of automatic action and of the capacity to fire high-performance military ammunition.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

What the above quoted britannica article said:

Quote:
In those countries where assault rifles can be purchased in the civilian market, their sale is subject to various restrictions, such as the elimination of automatic action and of the capacity to fire high-performance military ammunition.

And by eliminating those functions of the assault rifle, which the Brittannica article states are specific functions that an assault rifle possesses (fully automatic fire) you no longer have an assult rifle.

Good point.

0 Replies

Wow... talk about reading what you want into a statement...

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Wow... talk about reading what you want into a statement...

Isn't that what the article says.

An assult weapon is fully automatic.
Civilian versions sold have had "elimination of automatic action".

Therefore, the civilian version of the assult rifle is not an assult rifle because it does not meet the specific requirements that designate an assult rifle an assult rifle. They do indeed look like assult rifles, but functionally and mechanically are distinctly different.

0 Replies

I dunno. I just know I've read this thread and was trying to follow along and then got all confused about what was automatic and what was assault, etc.

I think if you shoot somebody or something with any of them you've assaulted them even if their an intruder.

And, I'm not at all sure how one could train members to attack enemies WITH mercy.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

And Joe, fully automatic weapons are legal, you can buy one if you like, you just have to go through a pretty long legal process to get a permit.

Well, no, I can't buy a fully automatic weapon if I like. Private ownership of fully automatic weapons is prohibited in the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois, as is also the case in many other municipalities and states (to check if you can have a machine gun of your very own, look here). Furthermore, the federal government, in addition to other requirements, mandates an FBI background check for anyone seeking to purchase a fully automatic weapon. The federal and state regulations effectively amount to a ban on the private ownership of such weapons, although it is true that a relative handful of individuals legally own fully automatics.

0 Replies

NRA trains members to attack enemies without mercy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know