Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure

[David Horn]

(03-02-2018, 10:09 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(03-02-2018, 08:24 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: ... It's not a "basic right" to buy a weapon of war. Exactly which models constitute one, is the argument the gun advocates still use to try to confuse the issue.

Hint. The weapons of war are more deadly. We aren't talking about weapons of war. We are talking about weapons that shoot a tinch faster but are less powerful than a semi automatic deer rifle. What's the difference between bang bang bang bang and bang bang bang. Well, that's the difference between an AR-15 and a standard Remington semi automatic rifle. If someone contests the stores right to change the legal age, they'll win because Walmart has no legal leg to stand on. It's a ploy.

No, you are wrong on this.  What makes an AR-15 a military arm is exactly what makes an AK-47 one.  Both have detachable magazines that can hold as many as 30 rounds (perhaps more in some cases).  Both use high velocity, minimally stable rounds, though the AR-15 is both faster and less stable.  Those two criteria alone are enough for me.  High capacity is the root of all the problems we've seen with mass shootings.  The speed and stability of the rounds make them more deadly and able to penetrate body armor ... unless it's the armor we supply our troops.  In short, they have no civilian application outside a SWAT team.

FWIW, I wouldn't stop there.  Armor piercing rounds should NEVER be sold to anyone, but they are for sale in stores and on the Internet.  Another item on the 'never should be available' list are 50 caliber sniper rifles like these: