This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Clown U.S. Senator says that video games are bigger problem than hand guns

#81TheBlueStigPosted 2/4/2013 7:07:10 PM
TheArcade posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
I refuse to believe doing nothing is the answer 323 deaths is still too high. That illustrates more kills via assault rifles than there are months.

No, via RIFLES IN GENERAL, most of the 323 number is regular rifles. From all other sources less than 2% of ALL GUN CRIME is done with "assault rifles" (incorrect definition to begin with).

If you go by the TRUE definition of "assault rifle" (100% legal full auto in 18 states), they're NOT used in crime at all, the legal buyers are fully vetted by the BATFE and the FBI and the weapons are ridiculously expensive.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

The exact definition of the term in this context varies among each of the various jurisdictions limiting or prohibiting assault weapon manufacture, importation, sale, or possession, and legislative attempts are often made to change the definitions. Governing and defining laws include the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban,[2] as well as state and local laws often derived from or including definitions verbatim from the expired Federal Law.

In other words an assault rifle is subject to interpretation.


No, it isn't. In order for a weapon to be considered a true assault rifle under the Military definition (political definitions do NOT COUNT because they're based on LOOKS, not functionality), it needs 2 very specific qualifications.

1. It must be chambered in a medium rifle caliber.
2. It must have Select Fire capability.

Number 2 is the most important one because Select Fire means the weapon MUST have the ability to go from semi-auto to FULL AUTO. Without full auto capability the weapon CANNOT be considered an assault rifle. That means that NO semi-auto-only weapon can be considered an "assault rifle".

Number 1 is also important because everything that's NOT chambered in a rifle caliber is also instantly disqualified. And weapons chambered in pistol calibers make up the largest part of Feinstein's ban list.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#82The DevourerPosted 2/4/2013 7:11:36 PM
TheArcade posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
I refuse to believe doing nothing is the answer 323 deaths is still too high. That illustrates more kills via assault rifles than there are months.

No, via RIFLES IN GENERAL, most of the 323 number is regular rifles. From all other sources less than 2% of ALL GUN CRIME is done with "assault rifles" (incorrect definition to begin with).

If you go by the TRUE definition of "assault rifle" (100% legal full auto in 18 states), they're NOT used in crime at all, the legal buyers are fully vetted by the BATFE and the FBI and the weapons are ridiculously expensive.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

The exact definition of the term in this context varies among each of the various jurisdictions limiting or prohibiting assault weapon manufacture, importation, sale, or possession, and legislative attempts are often made to change the definitions. Governing and defining laws include the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban,[2] as well as state and local laws often derived from or including definitions verbatim from the expired Federal Law.

In other words an assault rifle is subject to interpretation.


They use ambiguous language for a reason. To confuse and push their agendas. "Assault weapon" is not a real thing... any weapon can be an assault weapon really because... well... a weapon used in assault. Assault rifles are fully automatic rifles. Notice how they always say assault weapon when talking about this stuff though.
---
FX6100, HD7970, 8G DDR3 1600, 750G/400/1T SATA2/3, 700W, Logitech G5/G510, Win7
XPS16 - i7 720QM, 6G DDR3@1333, 500G SATA, HD4670 1G, Win7
#83TheArcadePosted 2/4/2013 8:13:20 PM
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
I refuse to believe doing nothing is the answer 323 deaths is still too high. That illustrates more kills via assault rifles than there are months.

No, via RIFLES IN GENERAL, most of the 323 number is regular rifles. From all other sources less than 2% of ALL GUN CRIME is done with "assault rifles" (incorrect definition to begin with).

If you go by the TRUE definition of "assault rifle" (100% legal full auto in 18 states), they're NOT used in crime at all, the legal buyers are fully vetted by the BATFE and the FBI and the weapons are ridiculously expensive.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

The exact definition of the term in this context varies among each of the various jurisdictions limiting or prohibiting assault weapon manufacture, importation, sale, or possession, and legislative attempts are often made to change the definitions. Governing and defining laws include the now-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban,[2] as well as state and local laws often derived from or including definitions verbatim from the expired Federal Law.

In other words an assault rifle is subject to interpretation.


No, it isn't. In order for a weapon to be considered a true assault rifle under the Military definition (political definitions do NOT COUNT because they're based on LOOKS, not functionality), it needs 2 very specific qualifications.

1. It must be chambered in a medium rifle caliber.
2. It must have Select Fire capability.

Number 2 is the most important one because Select Fire means the weapon MUST have the ability to go from semi-auto to FULL AUTO. Without full auto capability the weapon CANNOT be considered an assault rifle. That means that NO semi-auto-only weapon can be considered an "assault rifle".

Number 1 is also important because everything that's NOT chambered in a rifle caliber is also instantly disqualified. And weapons chambered in pistol calibers make up the largest part of Feinstein's ban list.


The mistake Mrs. Feinstein made is requiring 2 features it's cursed with loop holes. Now we know better if it's got so much as 1 feature it's an assault weapon, period. See the New York bill. BTW the features you mentioned are THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

The politicians may define assault rifles however way they choose. Weapons can evolve or become modified over time making it possible for one weapon to copy another. There's nothing you can come up with that prevents elected officials from changing it.
---
Greatest Shows of All Time.
Avatar: The Last Airbender, SWAT Kats, Sailor Moon, Tetsuwan Atom 2K3, Transformers, Spiderfriends
#84TheBlueStigPosted 2/4/2013 9:14:18 PM
TheArcade posted...
The mistake Mrs. Feinstein made is requiring 2 features it's cursed with loop holes. Now we know better if it's got so much as 1 feature it's an assault weapon, period. See the New York bill. BTW the features you mentioned are THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

The politicians may define assault rifles however way they choose. Weapons can evolve or become modified over time making it possible for one weapon to copy another. There's nothing you can come up with that prevents elected officials from changing it.


Brainwashed Much? Do you even realize what you just said? If a gun has just ONE feature it's considered an assault rifle to you?

Feinstein has gone through gun catalogs and circled the pictures of all the guns she wanted to ban, they were all pictured right next to the same weapon variants that had wood stocks instead of black metal or plastic. She never circled the weapons with wood stocks that had the same functionality as the other weapons.

That's how much of a Nazi Hypocrite she really is. She doesn't actually care about functionality, she cares about LOOKS which proves how clueless she really is.

She has a concealed carry permit, admits that she'll shoot anyone who tries to harm her, but refuses to grant that same right to any civilian from her own state. She'll force them to become a victim of violent crime first, she'll force them to end up in the f***ing hospital damn near bleeding to death before she'll sign the papers to give them a concealed carry permit. She claims that the police are enough to protect everybody.....this was AFTER the LA Riots where the cops ran away and let the people riot, and AFTER the 2005 SCOTUS decision that said the cops don't legally have to protect anyone at any time, even under a judge's order of protection. It was also AFTER one of her own California cops executed someone laying face down on the ground in handcuffs at a BART station.

Remind me again, which state had the HIGHEST firearm homicide totals combined with the STRICTEST gun laws ? ? ?

Answer = California

Which state is Feinstein a Senator in?

Answer = California

Do you REALLY think she's qualified to create a "crime stopping bill" when her state is the worst in the country?

Here's what a California Sheriff thinks of Feinstein's proposal.....

http://www.mydesert.com/article/20130204/NEWS01/302040005/Gun-control-legislation-Riverside-County-sheriff-calls-on-Sen-Feinstein-to-drop-proposal

In his letter, Sniff said he thinks people universally support efforts to keep firearms “out of the hands of those who should not have them,” but called Feinstein’s proposal a “pretext gun control” bill with unreasonable and unnecessary regulations.

“It places legitimate citizens, both now and in the future, at potential risk of not being able to lawfully defend themselves,
or to participate in legitimate recreational shooting sports that should be available to all across our great nation,” Sniff wrote. “In the end, I believe this proposed bill will cause far more harm than any good.”

---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#85NickDrakePosted 2/4/2013 10:37:51 PM(edited)
The Devourer posted...
FredSavage27 posted...
What exactly are handguns supposed to do against a government with tanks and drone strikes?


Well for one the military is composed of citizens. They likely wouldn't all comply, likely enough that it would hinder the government because they need operators for these things.


And what do you think the government is composed of?

---
Take a look at the Lawman beating up the wrong guy
Oh, man! Wonder if he'll ever know...
#86TheArcadePosted 2/4/2013 10:50:49 PM
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
The mistake Mrs. Feinstein made is requiring 2 features it's cursed with loop holes. Now we know better if it's got so much as 1 feature it's an assault weapon, period. See the New York bill. BTW the features you mentioned are THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

The politicians may define assault rifles however way they choose. Weapons can evolve or become modified over time making it possible for one weapon to copy another. There's nothing you can come up with that prevents elected officials from changing it.


Brainwashed Much? Do you even realize what you just said? If a gun has just ONE feature it's considered an assault rifle to you?

Feinstein has gone through gun catalogs and circled the pictures of all the guns she wanted to ban, they were all pictured right next to the same weapon variants that had wood stocks instead of black metal or plastic. She never circled the weapons with wood stocks that had the same functionality as the other weapons.

That's how much of a Nazi Hypocrite she really is. She doesn't actually care about functionality, she cares about LOOKS which proves how clueless she really is.

She has a concealed carry permit, admits that she'll shoot anyone who tries to harm her, but refuses to grant that same right to any civilian from her own state. She'll force them to become a victim of violent crime first, she'll force them to end up in the f***ing hospital damn near bleeding to death before she'll sign the papers to give them a concealed carry permit. She claims that the police are enough to protect everybody.....this was AFTER the LA Riots where the cops ran away and let the people riot, and AFTER the 2005 SCOTUS decision that said the cops don't legally have to protect anyone at any time, even under a judge's order of protection. It was also AFTER one of her own California cops executed someone laying face down on the ground in handcuffs at a BART station.

Remind me again, which state had the HIGHEST firearm homicide totals combined with the STRICTEST gun laws ? ? ?

Answer = California

Which state is Feinstein a Senator in?

Answer = California

Do you REALLY think she's qualified to create a "crime stopping bill" when her state is the worst in the country?

Here's what a California Sheriff thinks of Feinstein's proposal.....

http://www.mydesert.com/article/20130204/NEWS01/302040005/Gun-control-legislation-Riverside-County-sheriff-calls-on-Sen-Feinstein-to-drop-proposal

In his letter, Sniff said he thinks people universally support efforts to keep firearms “out of the hands of those who should not have them,” but called Feinstein’s proposal a “pretext gun control” bill with unreasonable and unnecessary regulations.

“It places legitimate citizens, both now and in the future, at potential risk of not being able to lawfully defend themselves,
or to participate in legitimate recreational shooting sports that should be available to all across our great nation,” Sniff wrote. “In the end, I believe this proposed bill will cause far more harm than any good.”

Addressing this part of your comment.

Brainwashed Much? Do you even realize what you just said? If a gun has just ONE feature it's considered an assault rifle to you?

I'm fully aware of what I said. It only takes one feature to make an assault weapon, a consensus acknowledged by the mainstream media. Your stance on assault weapons is in the minority.

I'll let you catch your breathe after hyperventilating. I won't bother reading the latter half of your comment where you decided to go off on a tangent.
---
Greatest Shows of All Time.
Avatar: The Last Airbender, SWAT Kats, Sailor Moon, Tetsuwan Atom 2K3, Transformers, Spiderfriends
#87TheBlueStigPosted 2/4/2013 11:58:56 PM
TheArcade posted...
It only takes one feature to make an assault weapon, a consensus acknowledged by the mainstream media. Your stance on assault weapons is in the minority.

You mean the Liberal media with the very clear biased agenda.

And what "one function" dictates whether a gun can be considered an "assault rifle" by the leftist liberals?

My stance on these weapons is held by everyone who owns one or more of them and can think for themselves, which at this point is in excess of 300 Million guns in civilian hands and fully half of the entire population of the USA.

Do you want revolvers, lever actions, and pump guns banned too? When will enough finally be enough for you Feinstein hypocrites? Or will you keep right on going until only the criminals still have guns?
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#88staticxtreme5Posted 2/5/2013 1:03:18 AM
Since when did clowns get represented in the senate? I'm not saying I'm against it, I just didnt know that was the case.
#89TheArcadePosted 2/5/2013 1:39:27 AM
TheBlueStig posted...
TheArcade posted...
It only takes one feature to make an assault weapon, a consensus acknowledged by the mainstream media. Your stance on assault weapons is in the minority.

You mean the Liberal media with the very clear biased agenda.


...

Oooookay. >_>

And what "one function" dictates whether a gun can be considered an "assault rifle" by the leftist liberals?


There's a rhetorical question. Since when did this become a partisan argument? Most gun owners agree with proposed legislation.

My stance on these weapons is held by everyone who owns one or more of them and can think for themselves


Baloney! The majority of gun owners aren't interested in your "do nothing" approach.

Do you want revolvers, lever actions, and pump guns banned too? When will enough finally be enough for you Feinstein hypocrites? Or will you keep right on going until only the criminals still have guns?


We keep going until fewer criminals have guns.
---
Greatest Shows of All Time.
Avatar: The Last Airbender, SWAT Kats, Sailor Moon, Tetsuwan Atom 2K3, Transformers, Spiderfriends
#90TheArcadePosted 2/5/2013 1:42:59 AM
staticxtreme5 posted...
Since when did clowns get represented in the senate? I'm not saying I'm against it, I just didnt know that was the case.

Mitch McConnell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TqAzn34W_U
---
Greatest Shows of All Time.
Avatar: The Last Airbender, SWAT Kats, Sailor Moon, Tetsuwan Atom 2K3, Transformers, Spiderfriends