Anti Gun Websites?

Status
Not open for further replies.

limbaughfan

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Messages
323
I was thinking about something after Oleg posted a thread about the VPC. I noticed all anti gun websites talk about assault wepons and "junk guns" and concealed carry, but you never see them complain about legal MG's. Basically what im trying to say is why do yall think they don't complain about machine guns.
 
Sheer ignorance. That and machine guns are a lot harder to get. What they don't understand is that when they 'ban' assault rifles, folks will just start legally buying real assault rifles and paying the extra money. So it's really going to backfire.
 
It is just suprising they don't make up some BS statistic to complain,you know just like they do with assault wepons.
 
There are bigger fish to fry. I can't even own an automatic weapon in my state, I can't buy a post 86 machine gun in states that allow it. A pre 86 machine gun has a tremendously inflated price and is already under tons of control. Semi-automatics are far more juicy. When they get as hard to get and expensive as fully auto guns then you might see their focus shift.
 
I used to assume when an anti meant "ban all automatic firearms!" that they meant fully automatic, turns out that they actually meant any "automatic" as in semi-automatics. They are very deceptive in their choice of words. Most antis that I have met feel that one doesn't need a semi-auto for hunting, the less strict antis seem to support home defense with a shotgun or a handgun but I rarely find anyone that supports "assault weapons" on the other side, even civilian legal semi-auto variants.
 
Well, I don't believe all anti-gunners think they are full auto MG's. I can tell you that every time I see a comment against the semi-autos it's worded as if it's a MG. Comments like, "Why does anyone need to hunt with a machine gun?", or, "There's no need for anyone to have a machine gun for self-defense!"
 
The anti's know that AR's and such aren't machine guns, but, iirc, a spokesthing from the VPC is on record stating that they need to exploit the fact that the average member of the public cannot tell the difference between the civilian-available guns and their military counterparts.
 
They don't talk about them because there is no crime being committed with them. Someone that has a legal full-auto has jumped through many hoops and paid a lot of money. Not the type of person that is going to be doing a drive-by or holding up a bank. Besides they would not be able to make up any statistics that show they are used in crime because these guns have not been used in crimes. Where as they tell you about how many people were killed by guns each year without mentioning the number of those that were legal self defense shootings. Most non gun people think that machine guns are already illegal anyway.
 
They don't talk about them because there is no crime being committed with them.
There's more to it then that though or they wouldn't be going after .50 weapons as aggressively as they do.
 
Because only rich folk can own them. And that's just fine by them. You think they want to ban firearms? Nonsense. They just want to prevent "commoners" from having them.
 
It is interesting also that you rarely see discussion about semi-auto's. They always refer to them as automatic pistols or automatic assualt rifles. This is a "spin" designed to get the media to use the same terms and that way the public will be appalled and side with them.

Many people don't have a clue as to the difference between fully auto vs semi-auto.

The media should be Zumboed everytime they make this mistake to stop the lies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top