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

[David Horn]

(03-04-2018, 11:44 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:

(03-04-2018, 12:58 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(03-03-2018, 06:16 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: Are we looking at a fully automatic rifle or a semi automatic rifle? Because that is the REAL difference between a so-called weapon of war and an AR-15. You keep slamming me about this or that and over this or that and I keep reminding you and every other ARROGANT BLUE that you guys don't know shit about me. I JUST MIGHT BE ABLE TO SURPRISE/SHOCK YOU.  Do you like California? Does California look like a nice place for blues to live? I could live without California. I could live without blues and all the trouble that they seem to start or create for the rest of society.

I've used the M-16, which is the fully automatic version of this weapon.  The typical use in war is either single fire or short bursts (2 or 3 rounds).  Since single fire is a typical military mode, and the weapon in question is the semi-automatic-only version of a standard issue military weapon, why is this not a military weapon?

And you're right that none of us really know one another.  You live in a blue/purple state, so you are not like a typical red state resident.  California, with a little of everything, looks like a nation rather than a state.  There are parts that would suit you much better than me.

It looks like what you used in Vietnam but it isn't like what you used in Vietnam. You know that's true and I know that's true. What's the point of trying to convince me otherwise when both know the truth. I own a Remington Model 700 bolt action rifle. A model that was used in Vietnam and still in service today. My buddy carried/ used one during the 1st Iraq war. I've used an AR-15. I had to pull the trigger to fire a round. I had to pull the trigger multiple times to fire multiple rounds. If I held the trigger after firing a round, no more rounds were fired. You're making a silly argument that isn't going anyplace with me as far as legality gun.

It's a scary looking weapon, I'll give you that one. It's a dangerous weapon, I'll give you that one too. It' a weapon that can harm a lot of people in a short amount of time when in the wrong hands or the hands of the wrong people, I will give you that one too. It's a weapon that can fire more rounds than the average firearm is able to, I'll give you that one too. I'm reasonable, I'm rational and I'm not stupid. However, my view of it is that it looks like a semi-automatic rifle to me and I have a semi-automatic, a bolt action rifle and a semi-automatic shotgun that could use to eliminate as a threat to you or any other blue reading this.

You agreed more than you disagreed with me, and where you agreed is where the problem lies.  Being able to fire 20 or more rounds without reloading is huge issue, in my opinion.  Having rounds that kill or maim easily is also an issue.  Do you know what happens when one of these relatively light rounds enters a body?  It tumbles, because it's supposed to tumble.  When it tumbles, it destroys everything it touches.  It's designed to kill people -- full stop!  It's not a weapon that belongs in civilian hands.