CNN: Average Americans don't need assault weapons

[Bill of Rights]

I was talking to my sister a couple of days ago, and she brought up the Colorado mass-murder. I corrected two errors in her thinking (more, probably, but those for sure)
1) I don't know about the state she lives in, but it is not illegal to carry a firearm in a movie theater everywhere. Nor should it be.
2) Semi-automatic means one bullet for every one squeeze of the trigger. You guessed it: she thought, as most do, that that term meant, "squeeze the trigger and it fires till it's empty".

Just as the antis wanted.

We have much education to do, one sheep at a time.

Blessings,
Bill

I don't get that. I understand people not knowing/caring about guns, but I expect people here to know English--especially those media idiots! Seriously, does she think a semi-circle is round?

Love the last line, however...

The crucial point on this issue, and one I've gone to lengths to explain in person when possible. Many, including even some gun owners, still don't know this. They see or hear "semiautomatic" - they think machine gun (like they saw in a Hollywood movie). Regarding the AK47 specifically, in addition to an image of being fully automatic at all times, they seem to think it is some kind of superweapon with power far beyond its actual capabilities.



Agree. Had the print version of this sitting on a shelf since the '90s.

The Great Assault Weapon Hoax

HTH

Just as MTC and Bill eloquently stated, most people believe that both "Semi Automatic" are full auto.

The Brady Campaign has been putting forth the propaganda for years, that if it looks like a machine gun, it is a machine gun

I didn't read MTC's link yet, but if it's what I think it is, it quotes where the antis (Handgun Control Inc., at the time, if memory serves) outright stated that the goal was to marry the image of a military-pattern (AK, AR, etc.) rifle with the term "semi-automatic", such that the general public would knee-jerk-associate the two... See a rifle like that, it's a machine gun, and should never be in the hands of anyone who isn't wearing our (gov't) uniform... in other words, someone over whom we (gov't) have control. In re: my sister, no, she doesn't think a semi-circle is round, she thinks, to continue your analogy, that half of it is round, and, guns being something of which she's frightened, having had them pointed in her face twice in her life, something of which she's willing to believe what the media tells her: "guns R bad, mmmkay?"

If an assault weapon is for assaulting someone, what's a goose gun for?
Does a Saturday nite special only work one day a week?
Is a sniper rifle for hunting snipes?
Who makes up these names and why do gun owners encourage this trend by repeating them?
AN ASSAULT WEAPON IS A MACHINE GUN...THEY HAVE BEEN ILLEGAL FOR ALMOST EVERYBODY
FOR 70 YEARS

No, they have not been. They've been taxed for over 70 years and for the past 26, we've not been able to buy them new, but not illegal. I'm not being pedantic; words have meanings, and we need to use them correctly, otherwise we're no better than the antis who intentionally obfuscate the meaning of "automatic".



Blessings,
Bill

 

[rhino]

I agree that the ignorance over self-loader vs automatic/select-fire should be corrected when necessary. I agree that incorrect use of the term "assault weapon" (which is almost always) should be corrected when necessary.

In the big picture, however, I think the distinction should be moot since none of the guns real or imagined should be restricted from ownership by adults who are legal residents of the US and who have not demonstrated that they can't be trusted (i.e. they are currently in prison).

 

[shortyforty]

here's an idea , let's limit the number of people who can be in any public place to 10, and the number of people allowed in an airplane to 10 that way should something happen it limits the damage caused

 

[Jarhead77]

I love how every single one of these anti-gun people begin their rant with a statement pledging their support of the 2nd Amendment or Americans right to bear arms. What a total crock of $hi!!. It befuddles me as to why anyone would take the opinions of an uneducated journalist seriously. These people know nothing about firearms so how do they feel knowledgable enough to write these articles? I don't read em because it just lowers my IQ.

...and the agenda becomes clear...Remember "the dumbing down of America!!!" The writers of this crap have consumed ALL of that kool aid!!!
If they make "us" dumb they think it makes "them" smart!!!

 

[Mosinowner]

We should make fliers describing semi automatic sporting rifles such as the AR15 then pass them out.

 

[jbombelli]

I think mathematically that there can only be ONE truly average American. Everyone else will be at least slightly away from the true average. So who is the poor guy they want to take these weapons from?

 

[netsecurity]

Seriously, the anything can be an "assault weapon". My sword is sharp enough to take off limbs. That can be an assault weapon because it can be used to assault people and it's a weapon

You are right! In China they ban guns brutally, and they have had more than 11* knife/machete/clever mass murders since Y2K. In 2010 a guy with a clever killed NINE** people, and injured 12 more, some seriously .

*Eight children killed in Chinese school massacre | Metro.co.uk

**http://abcnews.go.com/International...ttack-schoolchildren-months/story?id=10623240

etc:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-eighth-child-stabbing-attack-in-a-month.html

 

[MTC]

I agree that the ignorance over self-loader vs automatic/select-fire should be corrected when necessary. I agree that incorrect use of the term "assault weapon" (which is almost always) should be corrected when necessary.

In the big picture, however, I think the distinction should be moot since none of the guns real or imagined should be restricted from ownership by adults who are legal residents of the US and who have not demonstrated that they can't be trusted (i.e. they are currently in prison).

Yes, it should be moot within a wider context. It has been my experience in talking to people that it is considerably more difficult, and even counterproductive at times (or at least too seemingly vague), to get to the big picture without first addressing this key misconception, among or as well as others that often come up as objections or complaints in a narrower context (such as the topic of this thread).

Once properly addressed, (and if you can keep their attention or pique their interest), one can much more easily move along to "the big picture".

 

[Excalibur]

You are right! In China they ban guns brutally, and they have had more than 11* knife/machete/clever mass murders since Y2K. In 2010 a guy with a clever killed NINE** people, and injured 12 more, some seriously .

And this proves the point that there will still be crime in places that banned gun. And no it doesn't stop crimes with guns, it just makes them more specific. If someone REALLY REALLY wants to have someone killed, they will find a way.

Like in the UK, handgun possession is banned. I saw the movie Harry Brown and the idea that street gangs getting their hands on guns is real. It has happened in the slums and bad parts of the country. The feel good people that thought they made a difference in banning guns proved the point, now only the outlaws have the guns and they have used guns for crime on a whim in need be.

Banning the tool because it was used in a crime and demonizing it doesn't stop future crime. The Assault Weapons ban was completely ineffective because all it did was change how the tool look. You change a real metal scissor into plastic, but you can still kill someone with it. Forced padding on bats? I can still snuff your life out with the right amount of pressure. And completely banning something doesn't mean a determined killer won't use something else.

 

[Iroquois]

There are 300 million people in the US....There are 200,000 machineguns legal for civilian ownership
If there are no more allowed then not 1% of us can possibly own one in any conceivable scenario.
SO IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR 99% OF US TO OWN A MACHINE GUN!!! I SHOULD NOT HAVE DO EXPLAIN
FIFTH GRADE MATH ON INGO.

 

[devious169]

Lets start w/ banning politicians

 

[patience0830]

If an assault weapon is for assaulting someone, what's a goose gun for?
Does a Saturday nite special only work one day a week?
Is a sniper rifle for hunting snipes?

I LOL'd.

 

[Excalibur]

Lets start w/ banning politicians

Education is always the answer. Spread the education to everyone about firearms.

 

[NYFelon]

Education is always the answer. Spread the education to everyone about firearms.

In this case education is the answer, absolutely correct. However, the answer is not always education. Sometimes, the answer is bacon. Or 42. Then there are times when the answer is swift merciless application of overwhelming violence. For now though, let's just use education and bacon.

 

[Bill of Rights]

There are 300 million people in the US....There are 200,000 machineguns legal for civilian ownership
If there are no more allowed then not 1% of us can possibly own one in any conceivable scenario.
SO IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR 99% OF US TO OWN A MACHINE GUN!!! I SHOULD NOT HAVE DO EXPLAIN
FIFTH GRADE MATH ON INGO.

I'm going to guess that this is directed to me.

1) You don't need to shout.
2) That wasn't what you said. You said "...A MACHINE GUN...THEY HAVE BEEN ILLEGAL FOR ALMOST EVERYBODY FOR 70 YEARS", which is patently false. The registry was closed in 1986, 26 years ago. Up until then, "almost everybody" had the ability to purchase a machine gun, new, at least under federal law, though state laws differed.

3) As for your comment about "fifth grade math", if you learned in fifth grade that 2012-1986=70, I can only presume you went to government schools.

(Just to be clear, that's an insult on the schools, not on you.)

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Springer]

I hope the .gov goons don't find out about my sawed off 2x4.

I had a good laugh when I read this

 

[Iroquois]

Ok let's talk history...in March of '86 there were 100,000 machine guns (about). There was
200 million + living here. The states with the highest populations had prohibitions on NFA
(Still do) The NFA set the price of a machinegun tax at about two months salary for the average
American, the purpose of this was to deny owner ship to average citizens....
So legal machineguns were unavailable to almost everybody in 1934. Now they're less available.
So while my original decl.aration may have been poorly stated, I stand by the premise,
it has been impossible for the vast majority of Americans to own a machine gun since 1934.
In 1934 it was impossibly expensive, before 1986 they were banned in most
poputated states and since then there aren't enough to supply 1 out a thousand
of us. (You're right my math was off).

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Ok let's talk history...in March of '86 there were 100,000 machine guns (about). There was
200 million + living here. The states with the highest populations had prohibitions on NFA
(Still do) The NFA set the price of a machinegun tax at about two months salary for the average
American, the purpose of this was to deny owner ship to average citizens....
So legal machineguns were unavailable to almost everybody in 1934. Now they're less available.
So while my original decl.aration may have been poorly stated, I stand by the premise,
it has been impossible for the vast majority of Americans to own a machine gun since 1934.
In 1934 it was impossibly expensive, before 1986 they were banned in most
poputated states and since then there aren't enough to supply 1 out a thousand
of us. (You're right my math was off).

Until 1986 the ONLY limiting factor pending the law was money. Since 1986 it is now availability and money since the supply is limited but that does not make your initial statement correct.

I can go out and buy a machinegun tomorrow, just becuase I don't ro don't have the money does not make it "illegal for the majority to own one."

Further, the textbook definition of an "assault weapon" is a detachable magazine fed semi automatic rifle possess one or more cosmetic traits asociated with military rifles of the same design.

You are confusing that with "Assualt rifle" which is a select fire capable rifle firing an intermediate cartridge such as the AK47 and M16. Also not to be confused with "battle rifle" which is a semi or selectfire rifle firing full power rifle cartridges- M1 Garand, M14, FN-FAL etc.

 

[Excalibur]

You forget about the people who created the term "assault weapon" and the motive behind the people who use it. Even things printed in the dictionary are up in question because the people behind what a word goes in there is usage and popularity. The point in the end terms like "Assault Weapon" are just used to demonize firearms in general.

Assault rifle and assault weapon is interchangable. The fact that they had to INVENT another term for Assault Rifle to cover what isn't an "assault rifle" proves the point.

Remember a hundred years ago, a 1911 and others like it are called "automatic pistols" The term "semi auto" is something invented MUCH later. Automatic pistol used to describe a pistol that automatically loads another round without the user manually working the gun like double action revolvers that were the popular thing at the time. The same thing applied to the Garand. It was an "automatic rifle" because every time you shoot, the weapon automatically loaded the next round.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

You forget about the people who created the term "assault weapon" and the motive behind the people who use it. Even things printed in the dictionary are up in question because the people behind what a word goes in there is usage and popularity. The point in the end terms like "Assault Weapon" are just used to demonize firearms in general.

Assault rifle and assault weapon is interchangable. The fact that they had to INVENT another term for Assault Rifle to cover what isn't an "assault rifle" proves the point.

Remember a hundred years ago, a 1911 and others like it are called "automatic pistols" The term "semi auto" is something invented MUCH later. Automatic pistol used to describe a pistol that automatically loads another round without the user manually working the gun like double action revolvers that were the popular thing at the time. The same thing applied to the Garand. It was an "automatic rifle" because every time you shoot, the weapon automatically loaded the next round.

It is still proper to call a 1911 an "automatic" as machine guns are "fully automatic." Garands were not automatic they were/are "self loading."

The term "assault weapon" was invented just as all other terms are and have been invented it does not matter if we don't like who invented it, there is now a defined firearm that meets its definition which is NOT the same as assault rifle.

I'm not saying you HAVE to use those terms, there are plenty other out there, but if you are using them use them correctly. Just like mag/clip, bullet/cartidge/round, etc.