The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on February 17, 2018, 08:43:04 PM
-
shockey80 (663 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210247398
Any weapon that has the words military, assault, attached to it must be banned.
They are for military use only, Its that simple.
:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
The retard is obviously taking about the AR-15 style rifles.
Just a hint: AR doesn't stand for Assault Rifle... it stands for Armalite- the company who built the first ones in the 1950s.
Armalite was incorporated as a division of Fairchild on 1 October 1954. Their first design, the AR1 Parasniper [1] from 1952, used foam-filled fiberglass furniture and a composite barrel using a steel liner inside an aluminum sleeve. This was little used, but when they were asked to compete in a contest for an aircrew survival rifle their AR-5 and AR-7 designs from 1956 saw production use. This was followed by an invitation to compete for the new combat rifle for US forces, which led to the AR-10. The AR-10 lost the 1957 contest, but many of its ideas were reused in the smaller and lighter AR-15.
Star Member Blue_true (3,531 posts)
1. Only certain police officers should have them and never as personal weapons. nt
:whatever:
Star Member SunSeeker (27,610 posts)
25. Well, calling it a Sporting Rifle makes the microdick gun nuts think they're athletes.
I think they should be required to call it the "Rambo Wannbe Child Killer Rifle"
:thatsright:
ProudLib72 (7,079 posts)
3. That infringes on my god given rights to play army man
and, hence, make up for my inadequacies.
:whatever:
shockey80 (663 posts)
4. Congress must past laws that label them.
This is not rocket science. We are being stupid because we are letting extremists and greedy assholes control the gun debate. Every one knows what a military assault rifle is, they know what it is for.
:banghead:
Star Member Aristus (41,224 posts)
35. That's why the gun-****s are so feverishly trying to get us to stop
calling them"assault rifles".
They blather on and on (and on and on and on and...) about barrel length, grip length, magazine capacity, anything they can think of that sounds technical enough to lent weight to a stupid argument.
The most ludicrous result of their argument is that they want a weapon that can kill large numbers of people very rapidly with minimal re-load time, but they don't want it to have a scary name...
kind of like he pro-abortion folks... oh, I mean pro-choice... :whatever:
sarah FAILIN (2,022 posts)
41. That is not all.
There are other guns that have the same capacity to kill and can hold the same clips, but don't look like anything more than an old 22 rifle I have for critter control on my land. We have to go after clip sizes, not what a gun looks like. This is what the did in 85. Nothing over 15 rounds I think.
:rotf:
Star Member Skittles (118,204 posts)
61. so SICK of the gun humping apologist cowards
**** THEM ALL
:whatever:
-
Banning guns isn't going to happen. Got that, lurking shitgibbons?
Something that would help is if society would start stigmatizing creepy weirdoes instead of coddling them. I'm not talking about eccentrics or harmless goofballs, I'm talking about antisocial, hostile, creepy weirdoes--like the creepers at democrat underground immersing themselves in political assassination fantasies. That's the type I'm talking about.
-
shockey80 (663 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210247398
Any weapon that has the words military, assault, attached to it must be banned.
Well then! Ban Assault Rocks and Military Sticks! Or howzabout banning Military shockey80?!
-
The most ludicrous result of their argument is that they want a weapon that can kill large numbers of people very rapidly with minimal re-load time, but they don't want it to have a scary name...
Rental trucks have zero reload time, no scary name and can kill lots of people quickly. :-)
-
Well then! Ban Assault Rocks and Military Sticks! Or howzabout banning Military shockey80?!
:thatsright: Let's declare DU an Assault Forum and ban it. :thatsright:
-
shockey80 (663 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210247398
Any weapon that has the words military, assault, attached to it must be banned.
They are for military use only, Its that simple.
Simplistic and pointless "solutions" for simplistic and pointless people.
-
Label their welfare and SSI "assault checks" and watch how fast they backpedal.
-
Star Member SunSeeker (27,610 posts)
25. Well, calling it a Sporting Rifle makes the microdick gun nuts think they're athletes.
I think they should be required to call it the "Rambo Wannbe Child Killer Rifle"
"Rambo Wannbe Child Killer Rifle" is to big to fit in box #25 the model designation on the 4473. :thatsright:
Oh, and sunseeker, ESAD :bird:
-
Look up Kunming attack, DUmbasses.
Ok now what is it we need to ban?
-
Banning guns isn't going to happen. Got that, lurking shitgibbons?
Something that would help is if society would start stigmatizing creepy weirdoes instead of coddling them. I'm not talking about eccentrics or harmless goofballs, I'm talking about antisocial, hostile, creepy weirdoes--like the creepers at democrat underground immersing themselves in political assassination fantasies. That's the type I'm talking about.
Good point.
I believe the best way to prevent future mass shootings is a twofold strategy:
1) A widespread information campaign geared around educating the American public on the warning signs that a person may be at risk of committing a violent act, with a particular focus on encouraging them to act and contact the relevant law enforcement agencies if they see or know of someone demonstrating those signs. "If you see something, say something" on steroids.
2) (And this is what I guarantee would have prevented this most recent shooting, which incidentally happened at my best friend's old high school) Enforcing higher standards of accountability on law enforcement personnel to act swiftly and decisively if they receive such a report from someone. A citizen reported Cruz's suspicious behavior to the FBI, yet they did absolutely nothing about it until it was too late.
For an example of how my proposal does indeed work, in 2012, a few months after the Aurora movie theater shooting, someone in Missouri planned to perform a similar shooting at the midnight premiere of 'The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2.' However, his family noticed him acting suspiciously, did a little digging, realized what he was planning, and ACTED ON IT! They notified the cops, the guy was arrested, his planned shooting never happened, and God knows how many innocent lives were saved.
-
I had heard that, if the school had notified local LEOs that Cruz had been expelled, he would not have passed the background check.
-
I had heard that, if the school had notified local LEOs that Cruz had been expelled, he would not have passed the background check.
That kid should've never been able to own any gun. The laws in place failed. Taking the right to buy guns away from all legal people, would be the Dems ultimate dream.. an unarmed society. It worked so good for all the dictator's in the past. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao. Oh and I agree with a previous post.
ESAD Sunseeker.
-
It will be a sad day when they do that and these nut jobs are forced to use firearms with real killing power!
-
shockey80 (663 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210247398
Any weapon that has the words military, assault, attached to it must be banned.
They are for military use only, Its that simple.
We have plenty of laws in the books that were not enforced. How about enforcing existing laws?
-
They want to take our Swiss ARMY knives!!
:fuelfire:
-
We have plenty of laws in the books that were not enforced. How about enforcing existing laws?
Enforcing all the laws we have is cruel and offensive to a lot of people. Therefore they chose to ignore them.
-
We have plenty of laws in the books that were not enforced. How about enforcing existing laws?
Exactly. Had the current gun laws been enforced, none of this would have happened.
-
If I were to have an AR-15 (tragically lost in a boating accident), I would name it a piece of Boston Cream Pie. And if I were to have some 30 round "clips", I would only put two bullets in them. Thus making them very low capacity. Problem solved.
-
They really never think anything out do they? Canada tried to bad "Assault Rifles" and after spending a Billion dollars to put the plan in place very few people turned in their guns. IF the Canadians won't turn in their guns what makes them think Americans will do so outside of the junk guns always turns in to those buy back programs that have been on the wane lately.
-
They really never think anything out do they? Canada tried to bad "Assault Rifles" and after spending a Billion dollars to put the plan in place very few people turned in their guns. IF the Canadians won't turn in their guns what makes them think Americans will do so outside of the junk guns always turns in to those buy back programs that have been on the wane lately.
The NJ assault weapons ban took place about the time I moved there. The total number of outlawed weapons actually registered was about 1 percent of the number estimated to be held in private hands at the time the law took effect.
-
The NJ assault weapons ban took place about the time I moved there. The total number of outlawed weapons actually registered was about 1 percent of the number estimated to be held in private hands at the time the law took effect.
I saw a compliance percentage for NY's "SAFE Act" last week. I think it was as high as 4%. :whistling: