Straight talk about "Assault Weapons"
#1
Posted 20 October 2004 - 04:38 PM
It looks like we are going to be fighting against an assault weapons ban in Illinois. This is some good info to use against the anti's.
-Mark Twain
Sometimes ya gotta cause a little fruckus.
-Colleen Lawson
Certified NRA Pistol Instructor
NRA Range Safety Officer
Life Member- ISRA
Member- NRA
#2
Posted 29 March 2008 - 01:26 PM
I'll be the first to tell ya. I don't understand this aspect about guns at all. I don't know what an assault weapon is or how it's different from other weapons etc. etc..
But the term itself, "assault weapon", man, this has to work against CC in IL. And yes it's my stupidity; but, I'll put myself up against ya so you can refine your arguments and I can learn something.
What is an Assault Weapon?
What is it used for?
And like the name suggests, I have to ask the question: Who is it that you want to assault that you need an assault weapon? (I think that name is a strike against what ever you would want, so this question is pretty important, fair?)
That should get us started: ) Have a good one.
Comment: I would have not touched 'assault weapon' without first having gained CC. That's my personal view on how to approach this. Bringing this up prior to obtaining CC seemingly would hurt the whole movement; but again, I really don't know the whole story here at all. Consequently, I'm putting this out for discussion and at the same time, I'm being honest about what I percieve in this area -- putting it on the table if you will.
#3
Posted 29 March 2008 - 01:30 PM
-Mark Twain
Sometimes ya gotta cause a little fruckus.
-Colleen Lawson
Certified NRA Pistol Instructor
NRA Range Safety Officer
Life Member- ISRA
Member- NRA
#4
Posted 29 March 2008 - 04:52 PM
Quote
Smokey, now that the link has been fixed it might answer some of your questions better than I can.
In the most basic terms, an assualt weapon by definition must be selective fire or fully automatic.
These weapons have been heavily regulated and taxed {the liberal weapon of choice} since 1934.
What was actually banned by the 1994 "assault weapons" ban were firearms that looked scary but were functionally identical to most hunting rifles. The people who wrote the 1994 ban based the ban on cosmetics rather than functionality.
To make an anaogy, NASCAR racers are based upon regular production cars but have much more powerful engines and have wings and ground effects. They can reach 200 MPH which is illegal on any street in America.
So to stop people from speeding on the roads lets ban wings and ground effects from all production cars.
This accomplishes nothing because it's the mechanics, not the cosmetics, which make NASCAR vehicles so fast.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."-- Benjamin Franklin
#5
Posted 30 March 2008 - 12:20 AM
There's got to be a good cartoon in there somewhere. I know, and it scared the hoopLA out of every little ole lady in the state, I bet.
#6
Posted 30 March 2008 - 04:46 AM
it really helps:
Youtube Video - Truth about "Assault Weapons"
Illinoiscarry Document Repository
Thanks to everyone who has contributed! Lets keep em coming!
#7
Posted 04 June 2008 - 08:19 PM
#8
Posted 04 June 2008 - 08:23 PM
pizzaguy7, on Jun 4 2008, 09:19 PM, said:
The Koreans in L.A. during the Rodney King riots didn't have the luxury of waiting for police--they saved their businesses and homes from being burned down by standing on the roofs, with so-called "assault weapons."
"Vigilante work" had nothing to do with it.
#9
Posted 05 June 2008 - 02:28 PM
They function completely differently than assault weapons, and thus they are classified as semi-automatic firearms.
If we are going to discuss assault weapons, then we are talking about select-fire and full-auto guns, which have been regulated by the National Firearms Act since 1934. It's a different discussion, entirely.
And as for common semiauto firearms such as an AR15, I have used them successfully for hunting many, many times. They are becoming a mainstream hunting rifle. Plus, (and far more importantly) they are very useful for lawful self-defense as well. Finally (and perhaps more important, still) is that they are the kind of rifle I would choose if militia action were ever necessary. I am part of the militia (in fact any of us that are able-bodied and not a criminal or mentally ill are in the militia). I am prepared and trained (thus well-regulated) and would be obligated to act in concert with my fellow citizens, and would be obligated to bring my own effective firearm. And that is precisely why these local bans on semi-auto firearms are unconstitutional. They violate the purpose and spirit of the militia clauses...as well as violate the substantive guarantee of the second amendment (the latter half).
Lewis Carroll, 1872
#10
Posted 05 June 2008 - 02:49 PM
More than anything, the media likes to use the phrase "assault weapon" whenever possible to sensationalize their stories. Most of the time, the term is inaccurately applied to the firearm being discussed.
Does my AR-15 look similar to the weapons used by the military? Sure it does, but functionally, it's completely different, which is what most of the people that buy into the media hype don't realize.
abolt243
#11
Posted 05 June 2008 - 02:55 PM
Quote
In other words, they don't seek to educate the public about these firearms; to the contrary, they've intentionally exploited the public's lack of knowledge.
#12
Posted 05 June 2008 - 03:14 PM
The reasoning or rationale behind the perpetuation of a falsehood is simply irreleant at the most basic level. It's simply incorrect to refer to a semiauto as an assault weapon. Period. Whether the reason for the origin and perpetuation of the falsehood is one of mere ignorance or one of sophisticated dishonesty for political gain, it matters not.
Facts are facts, and semiautos are not assault weapons.
Lewis Carroll, 1872
#13
Posted 05 June 2008 - 03:19 PM
GarandFan, on Jun 5 2008, 04:14 PM, said:
The reasoning or rationale behind the perpetuation of a falsehood is simply irreleant at the most basic level. It's simply incorrect to refer to a semiauto as an assault weapon. Period. Whether the reason for the origin and perpetuation of the falsehood is one of mere ignorance or one of sophisticated dishonesty for political gain, it matters not.
Facts are facts, and semiautos are not assault weapons.
I agree that the rationale behind the dissemination of misinformation about these firearms is irrelevant to a discussion about whether or not they should be banned, but I do think it's useful to know just how much (or how little, in this case) to trust anything said by those advocating a ban.
It's always useful to know who the liars are.
#14
Posted 05 June 2008 - 03:32 PM
Quote
As for this comment, I'm not sure what it has to do with this discussion. If the police aren't able to get there in time, does it really matter what type of weapon you use to defend your family?
abolt243
#15
Posted 05 June 2008 - 04:01 PM
GlockShooter, on Jun 5 2008, 04:32 PM, said:
Quote
As for this comment, I'm not sure what it has to do with this discussion. If the police aren't able to get there in time, does it really matter what type of weapon you use to defend your family?
The police don't get there in time. If they did, there would have been 5 women walk out of Lane Bryant, all the students would have walked out of Cole Hall at NIU and none of us would have ever heard of Va Tech.
They investigate crimes, not prevent.
AB
The Roman Empire fell due to a large, corrupt government, overspending, an overextended military, insecure borders, and the illegal immigration of Goths, barbarians (anyone who was not educated), and religious fanatics. Sound familiar?
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams
Luke 11:21 - "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed." NASB
#16
Posted 05 June 2008 - 04:31 PM
abolt243, on Jun 5 2008, 05:01 PM, said:
GlockShooter, on Jun 5 2008, 04:32 PM, said:
Quote
As for this comment, I'm not sure what it has to do with this discussion. If the police aren't able to get there in time, does it really matter what type of weapon you use to defend your family?
The police don't get there in time. If they did, there would have been 5 women walk out of Lane Bryant, all the students would have walked out of Cole Hall at NIU and none of us would have ever heard of Va Tech.
They investigate crimes, not prevent.
AB
Exactly!
#17
Posted 05 June 2008 - 09:51 PM
#18
Posted 05 June 2008 - 10:06 PM
FST_Kent, on Jun 5 2008, 10:51 PM, said:
AB
The Roman Empire fell due to a large, corrupt government, overspending, an overextended military, insecure borders, and the illegal immigration of Goths, barbarians (anyone who was not educated), and religious fanatics. Sound familiar?
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams
Luke 11:21 - "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed." NASB
#19
Posted 05 June 2008 - 10:18 PM
#21
Posted 19 June 2008 - 01:26 PM
I realize this goal will never be obtained, but it is a goal none the less.
Anyway, this is America. Our laws have always been based on compromise and always will be, unfortunately we are now compromising over the bill of rights. That sends me a VERY disturbing message, it should be a wakeup call to all freedom loving Americans.
#23
Posted 17 July 2008 - 04:51 PM
Quote
on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an
entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the
lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny
the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition...would fail constitutional
muster.
"...to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
Though I may no longer be enlisted, and no longer have an obligation to the U.S. Navy, I still have a moral obligation to my country, my freedom, and the protection of my family.
I will stand by that oath for as long as I live.
Freedom's not free, the day we quit fighting for it is the day we will loose it.
"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away." Author: unknown
"The Constitution of the United States was made not merely for the generation that then existed, but for posterity -- unlimited, undefined, endless, perpetual posterity." -Henry Clay
#24
Posted 19 July 2008 - 08:39 PM
#25
Posted 24 June 2011 - 06:52 PM
tplane37, on 17 July 2008 - 04:51 PM, said:
Quote
on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an
entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the
lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny
the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition...would fail constitutional
muster.
They are not civilllian versions. Do your homework. The m-16 was developed after the AR in fact it is the military version if u want to go that route
#26
Posted 24 June 2011 - 07:38 PM
A perfectly legal firearm...
And put this on it.
And it is now no longer legal..
I changed nothing about the function of the gun but because it looks like an AR it is now "bad"
It is the same gun with a new stock, that is all.
Same .22 LR bullett, same 10 round mag.
(this is off of the Obama ban list
"Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15
God and the Soldier, all men adore,
In time of danger and not before.
When the danger is passed and all things righted,
God is forgotten, and the Soldier slighted.
"A gun is a tool, Marian. No better, no worse than any other tool. An axe, a shovel, or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that."
Alan Ladd, in the movie Shane (1953).
Freedom is something that dies unless it's used"
Hunter S. Thompson
We have the best government money can buy...
#27
Posted 24 June 2011 - 09:39 PM
#28
Posted 22 July 2012 - 08:33 PM
With the recent tragedy in Colorado there has been and will continue to be a lot of talk about "assault weapons."
Great information here. It helps to be educated when talking about "assault weapons" and debating with the un-informed.
A great opportuntiy to educate.
#29
Posted 17 December 2012 - 01:48 AM
#30
Posted 17 December 2012 - 06:07 AM
45superman, on 04 June 2008 - 08:23 PM, said:
I see nothing in the Illinois statutes that regulates "coyote rifles" to only hold 5 rounds...?
Am I missing something? I'd like to know before I do any coyote hunting around Christmas.
Open Carry - Proponent
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











