CarpeDiem3 0 #51 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteDoesn't matter much. An AK is still powerful enough to kill people, lots of them, in a small amount of time. It's not so much the size of the bullet, but the ability to shoot fast without reloading. Again you show us your lack of knowledge towards firearms. You seem to be calling me ignorant, but you've offered nothing to refute what I said. Even a little .22 rimfire gun that shoots real fast and has a high magazine capacity could kill a lot of people, right? QuoteQuoteWhat does the "A" in "AK-47" stand for? What are you trying to get at here? If you are thinking the "A" means "Assault" OMG you are too funny. AK stands for: Avtomat Kalashnikova (tried to post the actual Russian cyrillic word here but DZ.COM does not appear to handle Unicode) Translated into English it means: Kalashnikov Rifle Um, actually, "avtomat" means "automatic". So "AK" means "automatic Kalashnikov". In other words, the AK-47 was designed to be an automatic fire weapon. Something which you seem to be denying when you say that "automatics are prohibited or highly regulated". So I'm confused again - are AK-47's full-auto or semi-auto, and are they legal to own or prohibited? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #52 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteMost gun related crimes are committed with small handguns. Not large semi automatic AK's So maybe then we should ban small handguns. According to the FBI, violent crime went up 18% last year. Seems like a good time to do it. Yeah, that will solve the problem. Lets make crack cocaine illegal too. Oh, wait !! If crack cocaine deaths were up 18% in just one year, shouldn't we try and crack down on it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #53 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote...automatic firearms are already prohibited and highly regulated. If they're prohibited then there's nothing to regulate. If they're regulated, that implies that you can own them, but they're just tightly controlled. So those two things sound a bit contradictory. Which is it? I see people on TV shows shooting machine guns, so they must not be prohibited completely... You do realize the guns they use on TV aren't real guns, don't you? Not all of them. Shows like "Sons of Guns" aren't faking the firearms, they demonstrate full-auto firearms, and they're just civilians. So are you saying that full-auto guns are prohibited, and that the folks on that show are breaking the law when they build and shoot those guns? You haven't cleared up this confusion for me. Are machineguns prohibited outright, or just highly regulated? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #54 October 21, 2012 I am not calling you ignorant. I am simply stating that it appears that you lack knowledge of firearms (something rather common among many anti-gun peeps). Compared to some of the others around here, I am no gun expert. But I did spend time in a reserves military unit many many moons ago where I not only fired semi-automatics but was also given the opportunity to fire automatics. Firing them was fun fun fun. Cleaning them afterwards was not so much fun. I once had a debate here with a DZ.COMMER (can't remember who it was) and believe it or not I was taking a similar stance you are taking questioning the need for private citizens to use firearms one would associate with the military and their response to me was "We used them in the military, we got know them in the military, we got to like them in the military, we got to respect them in the military" and it dawned on me. I remembered my own experience with firearms while I was in the military and I remembered the respect my superiors forced me to have regarding handling firearms. So yes, it may be rare but sometimes debating others here on the Dorkzone can change your opinions. It is the person behind the weapon who decides to take the life. It is not the inanimate object that does the killing. Yes firearms do make the job of killing easier, but that still does not change the fact that it is the human who decides to use a weapon to take someone else's life. Oh and yes AK47s can come as automatics as well as semi-automatics. The rifle I fired when I was in the military came in two varieties as well. But they were two separate models. Some parts were interchangeable between the two versions. But the fundamental aspects that made one an automatic and one the semi-automatic were not interchangeable. If you tried to take the semi-automatic version and make it into an automatic, it would blow up in your face. The semi-automatic was just not designed to be fired as an automatic. Finally as I said, automatic firearms are already prohibited in the USA. Only an extremely small number of people are endorsed to have them. So when Obama says he will ban assault rifles, he is saying he will ban something that is already banned. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #55 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteObama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #56 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteObama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship. Careful, you will send the anti-gun nuts into cardiac arrest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #57 October 21, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Obama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship. Careful, you will send the anti-gun nuts into cardiac arrest. OOPS!Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #58 October 21, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Obama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship. Careful, you will send the anti-gun nuts into cardiac arrest. OOPS! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVecBww1vcE Edited because the second video wasn't about hogs... "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #59 October 21, 2012 QuoteI am not calling you ignorant. I am simply stating that it appears that you lack knowledge of firearms (something rather common among many anti-gun peeps). I'm not anti-all-guns, just anti-some guns. QuoteFinally as I said, automatic firearms are already prohibited in the USA. Only an extremely small number of people are endorsed to have them. So when Obama says he will ban assault rifles, he is saying he will ban something that is already banned. Well, there seems to be another definition of an assault weapon out there, that involves semi-auto firearms. And Obama wants to ban those in private hands. Can't say that I blame him. And there you go with that contradiction again between "prohibited" and "small number of people have them". Somewhere I read that there are 250,000 BATF registered machine guns - that's a whole lot more than "a small number". First you confusingly mix up assault weapons as being only full-auto, and then you confusingly mix up prohibited with, well not quite, some people can still own them. You're not making it easy for me to understand all this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarpeDiem3 0 #60 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteObama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship. So you're saying that an AK47 is the only suitable weapon with which to hunt hogs? And that nothing else will do? I find that hard to believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #61 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteMost gun related crimes are committed with small handguns. Not large semi automatic AK's So maybe then we should ban small handguns. According to the FBI, violent crime went up 18% last year. Seems like a good time to do it. So EVERY violent crime is committed with a firearm?? No wonder ammo manufacturers can't keep up. Banning things this country has never worked. Cocaine, Prostitution, drunk driving (alcohol all together). All of these things are "banned"/ illegal. Last I checked the DEA, ATF, LEO are all busy trying to stop these things. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #62 October 21, 2012 QuoteBanning things this country has never worked. Nonsense. Literally millions of people are alive today simply because it would be illegal to kill them. I can think of two or three right off the top of my head.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #63 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteObama did say in the debate that he wants to ban assault weapons, and well he should. Nobody needs to own those high-powered guns. The only thing they're good for is killing large numbers of people. You don't need an AK47 to deer hunt. In the south we use them to hunt hogs. Couldn't you use something else to hunt hogs instead? I don't think you understand the hog infestation or the people that hunt them. Out in Texas they use helicopters with virtual target sighting and remote control firing mechanisms. That is sort of like a gunship. So you're saying that an AK47 is the only suitable weapon with which to hunt hogs? And that nothing else will do? I find that hard to believe. I tell you what stand in front of a 300lb male hog with 6 inch teeth charging at you. You have one shot to kill the pig. if you put the bullet in the forehead its not gonna penetrate the skull. If you put it in the shoulder the thick cartilage is gonna protect it. Think you can make that shot knowing if you miss the hog might kill you? Doubt it. SO yes being able to fire several rounds at the target quickly makes it a lot easier. And just to be clear wild hogs cause billions of dollars in damage to farmers and ranchers yearly, so yes they need to be eradicated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #64 October 21, 2012 I love how folks play this false equivalency depending on how they want their part of the argument to go. When the Anti-Gun folk talk about doing away with "Assault Weapons" then the Pro-Gun guys say there is no difference between an "Assault Weapon" and a hunting rifle. But when the talk gets specific like this "wild hog" issue you've just brought up, then there is no equivalent weapon that can take down the "wild hog." OK. Which is it? Is an "Assault Weapon" the same as a hunting rifle, or can hunting rifles not kill as efficiently as an "Assault Weapon"?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #65 October 21, 2012 Quote there seems to be another definition of an assault weapon out there You mean those scary black guns? Yeah those are bad, they need to be banned because they are black and scary looking. Did you watch that video Ian commented on? You know the one where the police officer told you about the differences in firearms and showed you that there is little difference between a standard semi-automatic hunting rifle and the scary looking black semi-automatic rifle once he stripped both versions down to the action. Then he proceeded to take the hunting rifle and started adding black plastic accessories to it making it look like a scary assault rifle. You know this video: The Truth About Semi-Auto Firearms Once again the AK47 fires a 7.62x39mm round while the standard .308 hunting rifle fires a 7.62x51mm round. Both rounds can kill, heck a .22 can kill. But the standard .308 round is much more powerful than an AK47 round. Semi-automatic AK47s are no more dangerous than semi-auto .308 hunting rifles and both can be fired at basically the same rate, though if you are planning on dragging your rifle through sand, water and mud, you have a better chance of it working if it is an AK47. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #66 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuote And there you go with that contradiction again between "prohibited" and "small number of people have them". Somewhere I read that there are 250,000 BATF registered machine guns - that's a whole lot more than "a small number". First you confusingly mix up assault weapons as being only full-auto, and then you confusingly mix up prohibited with, well not quite, some people can still own them. You're not making it easy for me to understand all this. Even the BATFE doesn't know how to properly label firearms. A machine gun is rarely magazine, but rather belt fed. They are usually large and heavy and use a 2 man team to operate. Also I believe it has to have a certain rate of fire (Rounds Per Minute) to meet the true definition of a machine gun I highly doubt there are 250k privately owned machine guns. Most are probably what are properly referred to as automatic rifles. Those are either fired from the shoulder or the hip and magazine fed. In order for those to be owned by a private citizen or company they have to be 1. Legal in that state 2. Registered and Licensed through the ATF There are several steps in getting them legally registered. Labeling a firearm an "assault rifle" is like calling every smart phone an Iphone. Its just not accurate. The problem with the current law is nobody can clearly define what makes a firearm an assault-rifle is this an assault rifle?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBjUDCyDCuI The answer is no. It is a full auto pistol. Although very rare they do exist. Can it cause massive causalities in a large group of people. You bet. Think back to the Charles Whitman who killed 13, and injured 32 in 1966. Did he use an assault rifle?? Nope he used a couple of bolt action rifles and a shotgun. Just like the debate in the swoop forum, ANY canopy can be swooped. All it takes is the right pilot. ANY firearm can kill people, its just up to the operator to choose how it will be used. ETA: more info Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jtiflyer 0 #67 October 21, 2012 QuoteI love how folks play this false equivalency depending on how they want their part of the argument to go. When the Anti-Gun folk talk about doing away with "Assault Weapons" then the Pro-Gun guys say there is no difference between an "Assault Weapon" and a hunting rifle. But when the talk gets specific like this "wild hog" issue you've just brought up, then there is no equivalent weapon that can take down the "wild hog." OK. Which is it? Is an "Assault Weapon" the same as a hunting rifle, or can hunting rifles not kill as efficiently as an "Assault Weapon"? would you take a navigator 260 to a swoop comp? How about an para-commander to film CRW? Its about being able to use the right tool for the job at hand. Firearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw, pick the right tool for the job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #68 October 21, 2012 QuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #69 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks. Assault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them are very good"tool for personal protection. If the threats of violence and rioting coming from the left wingers if Obama loses are carried out, an "assault weapon" could be a very valuable tool. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #70 October 21, 2012 QuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #71 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #72 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. It's the etymology of the phrase. Simple fact. I can't help that.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #73 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. It's the etymology of the phrase. Simple fact. I can't help that. Godwin would be pleased. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jtiflyer 0 #74 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks. Actually politicians would consider most hunting rifles as "assault weapons"? Why? Cause there is not a clear set definition of assault weapons. Most hunting rifles can be changed to or are considered "assault weapons" due to things as simple as changing the grip, adding a different muzzle break, or by having a detachable magazine. If you were to lay an M-14, an AR 15, and a springfield M1A out in-front of most people (especially politicians), most could not identify which is the full auto firearm. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jtiflyer 0 #75 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteBanning things this country has never worked. Nonsense. Literally millions of people are alive today simply because it would be illegal to kill them. I can think of two or three right off the top of my head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoLuTjguJA even the politically controlled media agrees, banning guns doesn't curb gun violence. Adding more laws preventing law abiding citizens from owning and carrying firearms just puts those citizens at a disadvantage when confronted by a criminal Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 3 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
jtiflyer 0 #67 October 21, 2012 QuoteI love how folks play this false equivalency depending on how they want their part of the argument to go. When the Anti-Gun folk talk about doing away with "Assault Weapons" then the Pro-Gun guys say there is no difference between an "Assault Weapon" and a hunting rifle. But when the talk gets specific like this "wild hog" issue you've just brought up, then there is no equivalent weapon that can take down the "wild hog." OK. Which is it? Is an "Assault Weapon" the same as a hunting rifle, or can hunting rifles not kill as efficiently as an "Assault Weapon"? would you take a navigator 260 to a swoop comp? How about an para-commander to film CRW? Its about being able to use the right tool for the job at hand. Firearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw, pick the right tool for the job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #68 October 21, 2012 QuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #69 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks. Assault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them are very good"tool for personal protection. If the threats of violence and rioting coming from the left wingers if Obama loses are carried out, an "assault weapon" could be a very valuable tool. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #70 October 21, 2012 QuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #71 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #72 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. It's the etymology of the phrase. Simple fact. I can't help that.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #73 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAssault Weapons as gun-o-phobes like to call them . . . Pretty sure the term originates with Nazis in WWII. This is not me calling you a Nazi, just being factual. Sure it is. Either that or you were just hard-pressed to find another way to say the first thing that popped into your head. No worries, I've been called worse. It's the etymology of the phrase. Simple fact. I can't help that. Godwin would be pleased. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #74 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteFirearms are just that, a tool. Same as a hammer or saw . . . . So, then . . . "Assault Weapons" . . . are in fact different than hunting rifles. And since they are -specifically- designed for the purpose of killing human combatants they have no business in the hands of the vast majority of people. Thanks. Actually politicians would consider most hunting rifles as "assault weapons"? Why? Cause there is not a clear set definition of assault weapons. Most hunting rifles can be changed to or are considered "assault weapons" due to things as simple as changing the grip, adding a different muzzle break, or by having a detachable magazine. If you were to lay an M-14, an AR 15, and a springfield M1A out in-front of most people (especially politicians), most could not identify which is the full auto firearm. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtiflyer 0 #75 October 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteBanning things this country has never worked. Nonsense. Literally millions of people are alive today simply because it would be illegal to kill them. I can think of two or three right off the top of my head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoLuTjguJA even the politically controlled media agrees, banning guns doesn't curb gun violence. Adding more laws preventing law abiding citizens from owning and carrying firearms just puts those citizens at a disadvantage when confronted by a criminal Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)