What’s does the term mean and should we regulate it?
That’s not true. The AR-556 is essentially a short-barrel rifle and its bullets travel at a higher velocity than a handgun. The ATF normally strictly regulates these in same category as machine guns and hand grenades but the manufacturer designed it to evade the ATF definition https://t.co/foLY1H5UOI— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) March 24, 2021
It's just an appearance thing. You can kill a man with a rock and sling, granted you might have to get good with that sling for a lot longer than time at the range with a gas operated semi-auto. The M-14 was the predecessor to the AR, and the AR won not because of any loopholes as you say above, but because 5.56 is lighter than.308, and the weapon system was easier to maintain.
Actual machineguns are hard to get, then rarely used in crimes as they are heavy and very expensive too. AR-15s are a popular choice because they're so cheap, though there is a magazine fed shotgun that's cheaper right now, so that may change. It came out to specifically meet "assault weapon" laws ironically. Submachineguns may be loophole rifles that you're talking about. Except for the AK-74 they fire pistol rounds. If you make a rifle barrel too short it will not fire accurately or reach anywhere close to a max range, and cause issues cycling rounds if semi-auto.
The version I saw had a simple push button mag release, that is "assault" according to CA, in the link above... what would the opposite be, a tame weapon?
I'd say a weapon becomes "assault style" at whim, and loses it just as easy. The M-1 Garand was the height of assault weaponry for a while there, now it's simply a.30-06 rifle that is cumbersome to load, impossible to mount a scope on, and semi-automatic. It played a pivotal role in winning WWII though.
Anyway, whatever the gun, I'm just glad, so very very glad that so many people turn to guns immediately. Would you rather poison gas or IEDs? Look at how horrifying the Japanese subway attack was with a poorly made nerve agent, or Oklahoma City with a van full of fertilizer. I'm so glad that we Americans are too stupid to "accomplish" that by and large.
If it was probable to make I'd say electronic trigger assemblies that can be disabled remotely. 911 call goes through for shots fired, just disable weapons in the area and record which ones return a ping, lots of problems solved with one technology there. Everything electronic more complicated than a flashlight on a weapon system is unreliable though. Also very little motivation for anyone to make anything like that.
Honestly what's happening right now is probably most effective if it keeps up. The cost of weapons is way down, but ammo is as expensive as I've seen it. It isn't a perfect solution but I've seen similar in Costa Rica, technically most of the guns there are illegal, but they're still cheap and move around. It does make the ammo much harder to obtain though and insanely expensive. Like the price for a.38 snub-nose was about the same as here, but the price for 100 rounds was $300. Pretty ornament with no bullets. From what I saw there, guns were not a big deal, buying them, selling them, or worrying about being shot.
Really more than guns or bullets, we need to get to the bottom of our drug and mental health problems. You can blame guns all you want, and I support the argument saying that it makes it easier to kill, but someone has to pull the trigger. I've been around a lot of weapon systems, and none of them fired all on their own because they were having a bad day. We have a ridiculous drug problem in the US, and our approach to mental health is demonizing those who have issues. Short term, you might get some impact from weapons, but those long term problems are going to persist and get worse. Back to Costa Rica a gram of pure coke is about a dollar, but you see more drunks. We're the ones consuming that blow and enabling mass production that makes it so cheap in country.
Specific immediate regulation in the US, just put a two week hold on purchases. I mean, there has to be realistic compromise somewhere. I don't want to give my weapons up, nor do I want to see more people get shot because some psycho got it in his or her head that the meth they're on will make it like a videogame.
Background checks for anyone buying a weapon from someone with an FFL, and a two week wait between purchase and pick-up, relax the laws on shipping them so FFL dealers can ship weapons to non-FFL holders who pass a background and it's like ordering from Amazon with cheap shipping. Gun shows would suffer, but if it stops something ludicrous in court or another shooting, it seems fair to me. I just don't see my state going for it.
An assault RIFLE has a meaning. That is an actual type of rifle. Assault rifles are completely illegal except for a few legacy rifles that were bought before they became illegal. Even when they were still legal, they were highly restricted and very difficult to obtain.
An assault WEAPON has no meaning. It is a political word, used to IMPLY an assault rifle. But in reality they are very very different. The weapons called assault weapons, are single shot like any other rifle or pistol. One trigger pull, one shot.
An assault RIFLE is selective fire. It can either be single shot, or switched to either full automatic, or burst mode. They are illegal to buy new, and have been for a long time. There are still some legacy assault rifles around, with VERY stringent rules and background checks to transfer them to someone else. The average person CAN NOT buy one.
The media and politicians love to use the word assault weapon to confuse people. And it works. I can't count the number of times people say an AR-15 is an automatic weapon, or call it a machine gun. It is not.
Another misunderstanding about assault rifles is that they are high power rifles. They are not. They were intentionally designed to be lower power.
Whenever you hear politicians or media mention assault weapons, just remember that they are intentionally trying to confuse you and imply something that's not true.
Assault style weaponry basically refers to either assault rifles themselves or weapons that (semi-) automatic rounds, especially those with extended clips and other add-ons such as bump stocks. To answer the question, I don't think regulating them would solve much of anything for a couple of reasons. For one, assault weapons are the best weapons for protection in certain instances. For example, not all criminals act alone and are unarmed. If a large group of people break into your home and they're all armed, your simple little pistol that you keep in the end table drawer next to your bed isn't going to help you in that specific situation, but your assault rifle definitely has a better chance of protecting you. Also, in my opinion, I doubt that regulating them would make too much of a difference because they would only be sold in the black market.
Simply making something illegal does not prevent criminals from using them. Street drugs are probably the best example of that, which are often illegal substances that are popular in the black market and are still commonly used despite their illegal status. Instead, if assault style weaponry does become popular in the black market, it would only result in law enforcement jailing more people that own them without actually solving the problem, which could increase tax dollars spent on prisons. Thus, the best and most cost effective way to solve the "gun control" issue is simply to focus on eliminating the reason that people commit gun crime in the first place by focusing on solving mental health problems, improving education quality, tackling poverty, and, if necessary, giving longer sentences and harsher punishments to people that commit crimes with guns rather than banning/regulating certain aspects of guns.
It’s just a fear mongering term created by the left.
I’ve even heard some leftists refer to a tactical pen as an “assault pen”. It seems that they like to put the word “assault” behind any item they don’t like.
If they actually knew what they are talking about, they’d know that military has access to weapons that are not available to civilians. But the leftists like to promote the nonsensical idea that civilians can purchase the same weapons that are issued to the military.
All guns are by nature, “assault weapons.” Most politicians who have an anti-2nd amendment agenda have created this false term to apply to any semi auto rifle that “looks scawwy.” Particularly the AR-15, which is the civilian, semiautomatic version of the fully automatic weapon the military uses in war. So much false info is being put out by these politicians and activists pertaining to so-called “assault rifles.” A great resource on the truth about these issues is Colion Noir (spelling IS correct) on YouTube.
It means that a piece of plastic looks scary to them. If only these shitheads didn't ultimately want to ban all guns maybe I would even entertain their ridiculous arguments. But until that time, remember that the 2nd amendment is amazing, gun rights are minority rights, and 'shall not be infringed' wasn't a request.
When the army can have nuclear weaponry and allow for atrocities such as Waco to happen it becomes clear that none of their regulations are meant to protect innocent people, but rather themselves.
What is a militia? At the time of the American Revolutionary War, militias were groups of able-bodied men who protected their towns, colonies, and eventually states. "[When the Constitution was drafted], the militia was a state-based institution," says Rakove. "States were responsible for organizing this." What did it mean to be well regulated? One of the biggest challenges in interpreting a centuries-old document is that the meanings of words change or diverge. "Well-regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well-disciplined," says Rakove. "It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now, in that it's not about the regulatory state. There's been nuance there. It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight." In other words, it didn't mean the stat
That is something that highly depends on the circumstances of the case. Situation in which the location of most wanted criminals and terrorists is known to be clear of innocent people, blast them. Situation in which all you get is hearsay about possibilities with innocent people and kids highly likely to get hurt if you go in guns blazing, well perhaps don't go in guns blazing.
it's a term coined by the left to oversimplify and classify the weapons they're pushing to get mass opposition for. It's funny to hear you talk about them not having any other purpose than to harm people, yet hand guns are used FAR more every year to hurt people. Nobody but other gun-fearing lefties gonna even take your posts about this seriously until you lefties can bring up that hand gun violence, but you won't and we all know why. It's because the skin color of the people using those hand guns for their crimes. You wanna stop being racist for a minute and come after GUN violence? and not just big scary looking assault style weapon violence because it fits your agenda?
Stop pretending like you trynna stop people from getting hurt, when you're entire political side ignores the guns being used the most to hurt people. It's a damn joke.
The term by itself is meaningless, it is used because the left find it scary, they are using it as the beginnings of a wedge to force law abiding firearms owners to give up the rifles they use legally be it at a range or for hunting because it 'looks like' a full select fire M16 variant which is illegal to own unless you've jumped through a whole lot of ATF hoops.
It is a range toy, few if any military units would use them all of them have feed issues and would use standard issue 30 round magazines, Hunters tend to use 10 & 20 round magazines for reliability.
Yeah, go tell that to any first generation Mexican immigrant who immigrated legally and pray that your face doesn't look like ground beef afterwards.
Since you're so intent on dodging the question, I'll answer it for you. It's someone who has gone through the legal channels vs someone who just decided that the rules don't apply to them, and is in the country illegally. Now, if someone is a citizen of another country and they're not authorized to be in the host country, they have no legal right to stay.
But we're getting sidetracked. If you want your vaunted gun control, do it the proper way and amend the Constitution. See where that gets you.
Other than that, there is nothing I can think of designed specifically to assault someone. Everything though, at one point or another, has been repurposed and used to assault someone.
I can promise you that the victims of "Seal hunting" would disagree with you.
The Harp seal populations in the northwest Atlantic declined to approximately 2 million in the late 1960s as a result of Canada alone. The effects of batons and similar clubbed weapons are so devastating that it led to Canada instituting quotas in 1971.
Greenland, in comparison, have adopted a different more humane way of hunting seals. They hunt seals with rifles.
Blunt weapons have claimed more lives than any other class of weapon in the history of mankind.
this is supposed to be ( What is “Assault Style” weaponry? ) which I copy/pasted. I gave my answer.
But if you referring to my response to the seal hunting with guns, Yes, it's way more humane to hunt a seal with a gun than to repeatedly bash it over the head with a blunt weapon until it died.
Anything fully auto and it's already regulated the media would love you to believe that it's not and anyone can buy a gun but that's false it's regulated and you already have to have a back ground check done before you buy a gun
"For private sales, any person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of the same state as long as they do not know or do not have reasonable cause to believe the purchaser is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under federal law." (22 states and DC require a background checks for all sales, some of the remaining 28 states require a licence for the buyer, which entails a background check when it's issued.)
Huh the more you know I guess. In my state it's illegal and it's supposed to be done under supervision of a licensed dealer but nobody does it lol another reason gun control doesn't work
How does someone come across these weapons that are military grade and those using them for the crimes they commit look like they aren't stable enough to carry a water pistol, simply put assault weapons are as its name implies to do as much damage as possible or kill as many as your clip or magazine will carry someone is supplying its not as it seems look beyond the headlines
An assault style weapon is a loosely used term, that often means a semi-automatic rifle, or semi-automatic pistol, with an arm brace, that often has a large capacity magazine.
Funny how skewed statistics lie. Take away the top worse criminal cities in the USA (New York, Chicago, Detroit, L. A.) we are one of the safest countries we s in the world. weird that those cities are all run by Democrates.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
