It wasn't an 'assault weapon'.

[mljdeckard]

I don't even see how they can call ARs 'modern' military weapons, the design is nearly 60 years old.

 

[Cosmoline]

I am as pro gun as anyone but this is a silly debate. Like down here in Texas everything is a coke, even if it's a Dr. Pepper.

It isn't a silly debate when drinking Dr. Pepper will land you in federal prison, my friend.

Their proposed law is concerned with cosmetic details and is one of the most asinine pieces of legislation ever drafted. It truly does ban something because of a scary shape.

 

[Cosmoline]

The moderators used to lock these non gun related threads down

Arguing the AWB isn't gun related?

 

[browningguy]

I think everyone needs to quit making noise about "assault weapon" and "clip". When you are reduced to arguing symantics you have lost the battle.

 

[moewadle]

As previously pointed out, however,

you can argue all you want about "it wasn't an assault weapon" but the US government will define what is an assault weapon and try to pass legislation regarding what is defined as an assault weapon by the government. So, argue all you want...it is moot....the government will define it with very tight specifics and then a bill will be introduced into one of the houses of congress. To paraphrase Shakespeare...."an assault weapon by any other name is still an assault weapon."

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

My understanding is that he still could have had 30 round mags because CT doesn't have a mag cap limit.

 

[Tommygunn]

These semantic games are annoying.

It's not "semantics". The weapon used was NOT an "assault weapon" AS DEFINED BY LAW.

The fact that a law "defines" it does not mean it is outside the purvue of semantics.

 

[TreeDoc]

They're calling magazines 'clips'. Everytime I hear this, I know right off the bat, they don't know what the hell they're talking about and probably have never even held a gun much less owned one.

 

[Frank Ettin]

It's not "semantics". The weapon used was NOT an "assault weapon" AS DEFINED BY LAW.

Fine. And now that the possibility of a new federal ban is on the table, I'm sure Congress will thank you for the tips on how to write the law to include more types of rifles.

...Their proposed law is concerned with cosmetic details and is one of the most asinine pieces of legislation ever drafted. It truly does ban something because of a scary shape...

Well then, maybe Congress will try to answer your objection by writing the law to ban rifles based on function, not cosmetics, i. e., a ban on all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. Would that suit you better?

 

[Zoogster]

While arguing that it was not an AWB can be counterproductive, pointing out they actually need to add more to thier definitions to ban what they want, the OP has a valid point.


Assault Weapon is legislatively defined, it does not actually exist outside of legislation.
It is a scary term that includes various handguns, shotguns, carbines, and rifles.
It is not just the things the layman pictures, even though they may be included.



Assault Weapon is a term successful at expanding restrictions because it has no real definition, but is close enough to the term 'assault rifle' that does have a definition to cause people to think they know what it means, and is simply scary to others because it has 'assault' as its description so much be bad.


In California a 1911 is an assault weapon just by having a threaded barrel. A semi auto pistol with a threaded barrel is an "assault weapon". The term means what the law says it means.


Now of course the danger of arguing one semi-auto rifle is little different from another is that you are basically pointing out what they want to ban is semi-autos.
That is what they did in the UK and Australia, they just call them self-loading instead of semi-auto.

That is why it is important to describe why effective modern firearms are protected and necessary, rather than get caught up in correcting semantics. The 2nd was about keeping the power in the hands of the people and detering tyranny. Detering invasion, and detering the government from turning on its own people.

Also why do the police use such firearms? Or if you only need X rounds to defend yourself, why do the police need Y rounds in the same gun to defend themselves (and they got backup coming and if on the offensive by that point several others with them with loaded weapons, so they should need even fewer rounds per individual. Obviously they have that many because that is what is standard, and is effective and realistic without handicapping yourself.

 

[Cosmoline]

i. e., a ban on all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. Would that suit you better?

I want them to try to ban all detachable mag firearms, or better yet all firearms, because that would impact a much broader range of gun owners and be all the more impossible to pass or implement. The goal is to delay, stymie and demoralize them with facts until they do what they always do and lose interest.

But make no mistake, if we hang I want everyone to hang together. They want to divide "hunters" from the rest of us. We can't let that happen again.

 

[Grassman]

I think the point of the thread is that the media types don't care that they are totally wrong in their definitions, it's never stopped them in the past.

 

[SEE IT LIKE A NATIVE]

They never "lose interest " it is an integral part of the liberal/socialist agenda ! They will use any method to further that agenda ! Kevin

 

[Springfield0612]

This is the best video I could find of the "AR" "ASSAULT" weapon that was removed from the trunk of the car. I am not sure about the facts assoctiaced with this video so please do not take that I believe everything on the internet I DON'T. But pay attention to the part where they are removing the gun from the trunk. I'll let you decide if it is an AR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de3lmAD5kXo

 

[browningguy]

It wasn't an 'assault weapon'.

You can call it whatever you want, we shooters tend to be very precise in our terminology, but the rest of the world isn't. Everybody else on the planet is going to call it an assault rifle, regardless of what a few shooters want to call them.

 

[barnbwt]

I think the point of the thread is that the media types don't care that they are totally wrong in their definitions, it's never stopped them in the past.

The media's job is (and always has been) to conglomerate facts into interesting stories to sell advertisements. They are more than capable of reporting gun issues accurately, honestly, and fairly. They just choose to not do so.

we shooters tend to be very precise in our terminology, but the rest of the world isn't

Actually, the media is fairly precise in its terminology on pretty much any other topic than guns. When's the last time you heard them omit the word "alleged" when describing a suspect? The last time they mistook the NYSE for the NASDAQ? They're both the same thing, right? The enduring "ignorance" of the basics of this topic is intentional, I assure you.

if we hang I want everyone to hang together. They want to divide "hunters" from the rest of us. We can't let that happen again.

Amen, force the fair-weather Fudds to put some of their own skin on the line, and see if they roll over so easily this time.

Assault Weapon is a term successful at expanding restrictions because it has no real definition

"So long as your strategy remains formless, the keenest eye cannot discern it, nor the wise make plans against it" --Sun Tzu

TCB

 

[OpelBlitz]

Nice usage of that Sun Tzu quote.

 

[barnbwt]

dupe

 

[jason41987]

i actually seen the footage of the cop pulling the rifle out of the trunk.. wasnt even an AR-15.. it had a side charging handle and a "drugonov" type thumbhole stock... appeared to me to be a saiga of some sort

 

[KMatch]

Regarding http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de3lmAD5kXo
Based on that video, the kid was innocent. The examiner clearly claimed the shootings were a "long gun" and the kid only had hand guns since the only "long gun" was in the locked trunk of a car. It couldn't have been him. I'm quite certain the facts are accurate as our officials and professional examiners are above making any mistakes. Now that I'm done babbling, my point is, this is the type of mis-information we are ALL being judged and prosecuted on.

 

[KMatch]

appeared to me to be a saiga of some sort

So, if it were, what's the chance of them banning shot guns? I put that up there with banning pro football. That would never happen. It wouldn't matter if it used shot shells. It was black and scary to the media.

And to touch on another poster above mentioning the media is more intelligent on other topics than guns, sorry... As a professional in the car repair field for 30+ years, I promise you, guns aren't the only things they slant, if not outright lie about.

 

[JERRY]

he used two handguns, an ar15 wasnt used.

 

[ball3006]

Don't get so bent out of shape over the word "clip". You don't complain about text messages not spelling words correctly but you know what is being said.

My M1 uses clips. And, you can reload the rifle faster than changing a mag in an AR or SK. Many million previous shooters of M1s can vouch for this as German or Japanese in not our language here in the USA.

I am still not clear on if the rifle was used in CT. The media in pushing their agenda, wants the rifle to be used so they say it was, wether or not it was...chris3

 

[BCCL]

This video of the trunk is a little clearer.

It sure looks to me like a semi-auto shotgun with a pistol grip stock, maybe a Benelli?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLrxSgkqJQc

 

[JERRY]

there might have been some sort of longarm in the car but the guns used to actually murder where two handguns.