Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
We teach water safety over here. And road safety.
Wal-Mart to stop selling assault rifles!
- Thread starter Ralphy1
- Start date
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Concordance at last. :grin:
Denise1952
Well-known Member
Walmart lies, as do many businesses that put big bucks before "serving" the people. I still believe you get what you give out, so they'll probably "get" theirs. Although I do respect so many, nice folks I know work there (well, they're there, you might have to catch them with a stun-gun to get help).
I change my mind a lot as some of you know, I hear it's a right for us gals, never heard that for the guys though
layful: so don't get any ideas But I am not sure I go along with selling assault rifles to the general public. But I also remember the American Indian trying to fight off "us wonderful immigrants" with bows and arrows, against rifles.
I'm dangerous enough with my hands alone as they are considered lethal weapons by some:
I change my mind a lot as some of you know, I hear it's a right for us gals, never heard that for the guys though
layful: so don't get any ideas But I am not sure I go along with selling assault rifles to the general public. But I also remember the American Indian trying to fight off "us wonderful immigrants" with bows and arrows, against rifles.I'm dangerous enough with my hands alone as they are considered lethal weapons by some:
amazing the BATF has no guns called assault rifle in their list of guns, but you continue to use it. Walmart announced they were stopping the sale of AR-15s and it was changes to assault rifles by the event driven media why aren't I surprised?
we could combine road rage, gun safety and driving into one on drive by shootings.
we could combine road rage, gun safety and driving into one on drive by shootings.
My Curiosity Beckoned
Went through the entire thread, usually avoid firearms-related argument. But, there remain misunderstandings and apprehension, most obviously. Thread sum-up:
1. Bullet: the actual projectile flying forth, NOT any of the other components needed to make up a ROUND of ammunition.
2. Bullet type: Mostly irrelevant. "Dum-dum", hollow-point, full-metal jacketed, non-jacketed, spire-point, "specialty" type, all commonly found for sale, and in general use by both Law Enforcement agencies, and members of the "Gun Culture". Note: Specialty types have been targeted, mostly unsuccessfully, by vote-seeking politicians claiming an intent to illegalize them because they are "Cop-killer bullets". Ridiculous, won't get my vote.
3. Bullet size: Range from quite small and light, to about 1/2-inch diameter, larger than that being governed by legislation. Absurd over-lapping of laws obvious on this one: shotguns commonly use a single very large chunk of material, instead of "shot", called a "slug", often almost an inch in diameter, yet completely legal. Many states only allow deer hunting with shotgun if slugs used instead of shot. Some disallow shotgun for medium to large game altogether.
4. Firearm ammunition containment: May be "single-shot", or "repeater". Repeaters include any arm which fires multiple times without reloading ammunition. Revolvers contain ammunition in their cylinder; semi-automatic (SA) pistols typically use a removable, reloadable "magazine" (it's NOT a CLIP!), SA "long-guns", shotguns, rifles, usually also use magazines. Some contain long tubes attached to the weapon, which act as non-removable "magazines". The remark made somewhere in this thread about "....how many bullets were in the chamber..." is technically incorrect. "Chamber" refers to the place in the arm where the round is actually fired. Only one round may be contained in the chamber.
5. Magazine capacity: Much furor, issue remains unsettled. Clinton's Crime Act made illegal, magazines capable of containing more than 10 rounds. Specifically, the ACT required Congressional Review, after 10 years, to determine the relevancy of "capacity" to crime rate. Review never took place. 2003, big magazines became "legal" again. During those 10 years, the BILLIONS of large magazines available everywhere remained legal! A crazed individual, hypothetically, unable to obtain high-capacity magazines, could conceivably carry 20 of the "legal" 10-round variety pouched on his person, and fire 200 rounds.
6. "Assault Rifles": Term thought to have originated when German soldiers entered a battle using a new, lighter version of fully-automatic rifle (i.e., "machine-gun"), in that "assault". Thus, by definition, no Assault Rifles have ever been sold to the public. They would fall under the National Firearms Act as machine guns. The "Assault-Style" rifles sold under that nomenclature, are actually no different than any of the many other similar semi-automatic rifles offered to the public.
As an Engineer, firearms are of intense interest to me, because of the endless variety of ingenious mechanisms which have been conceived, designed, built, and used in them. I have never hunted game, do not believe in the killing of defenseless animals, including human animals. Thus, there may be credible thought given to encouraging the occasional individual bent on using a firearm to kill innocent folk, to rather be certain he/she stalk only well-armed folks. imp
Went through the entire thread, usually avoid firearms-related argument. But, there remain misunderstandings and apprehension, most obviously. Thread sum-up:
1. Bullet: the actual projectile flying forth, NOT any of the other components needed to make up a ROUND of ammunition.
2. Bullet type: Mostly irrelevant. "Dum-dum", hollow-point, full-metal jacketed, non-jacketed, spire-point, "specialty" type, all commonly found for sale, and in general use by both Law Enforcement agencies, and members of the "Gun Culture". Note: Specialty types have been targeted, mostly unsuccessfully, by vote-seeking politicians claiming an intent to illegalize them because they are "Cop-killer bullets". Ridiculous, won't get my vote.
3. Bullet size: Range from quite small and light, to about 1/2-inch diameter, larger than that being governed by legislation. Absurd over-lapping of laws obvious on this one: shotguns commonly use a single very large chunk of material, instead of "shot", called a "slug", often almost an inch in diameter, yet completely legal. Many states only allow deer hunting with shotgun if slugs used instead of shot. Some disallow shotgun for medium to large game altogether.
4. Firearm ammunition containment: May be "single-shot", or "repeater". Repeaters include any arm which fires multiple times without reloading ammunition. Revolvers contain ammunition in their cylinder; semi-automatic (SA) pistols typically use a removable, reloadable "magazine" (it's NOT a CLIP!), SA "long-guns", shotguns, rifles, usually also use magazines. Some contain long tubes attached to the weapon, which act as non-removable "magazines". The remark made somewhere in this thread about "....how many bullets were in the chamber..." is technically incorrect. "Chamber" refers to the place in the arm where the round is actually fired. Only one round may be contained in the chamber.
5. Magazine capacity: Much furor, issue remains unsettled. Clinton's Crime Act made illegal, magazines capable of containing more than 10 rounds. Specifically, the ACT required Congressional Review, after 10 years, to determine the relevancy of "capacity" to crime rate. Review never took place. 2003, big magazines became "legal" again. During those 10 years, the BILLIONS of large magazines available everywhere remained legal! A crazed individual, hypothetically, unable to obtain high-capacity magazines, could conceivably carry 20 of the "legal" 10-round variety pouched on his person, and fire 200 rounds.
6. "Assault Rifles": Term thought to have originated when German soldiers entered a battle using a new, lighter version of fully-automatic rifle (i.e., "machine-gun"), in that "assault". Thus, by definition, no Assault Rifles have ever been sold to the public. They would fall under the National Firearms Act as machine guns. The "Assault-Style" rifles sold under that nomenclature, are actually no different than any of the many other similar semi-automatic rifles offered to the public.
As an Engineer, firearms are of intense interest to me, because of the endless variety of ingenious mechanisms which have been conceived, designed, built, and used in them. I have never hunted game, do not believe in the killing of defenseless animals, including human animals. Thus, there may be credible thought given to encouraging the occasional individual bent on using a firearm to kill innocent folk, to rather be certain he/she stalk only well-armed folks. imp
Technically the term is select Fire BATF doesn't use the word machine guns.
in reflection to #5 and the banning of high capacity magazines.
1.5 million owners in New York and conn. An additional 2 mil in wash. Colorado stand in civil disobedience waiting for the fed government to try and enforce this.
92 sheriffs dept. in these states have written Dept. letters to Obama stating they will not enforce that law.
in reflection to #5 and the banning of high capacity magazines.
1.5 million owners in New York and conn. An additional 2 mil in wash. Colorado stand in civil disobedience waiting for the fed government to try and enforce this.
92 sheriffs dept. in these states have written Dept. letters to Obama stating they will not enforce that law.
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
I've read all of that technical information but it has done my head in.
It all sounds so bloody dangerous, and I use the word 'bloody' in its literal sense.
It all sounds so bloody dangerous, and I use the word 'bloody' in its literal sense.
It's really simple just think of Monty Python
whats the speed of an unladen swallow. ( you can't have that gun it shoots too fast)
african or European (Assault rifle or hunting rifle)
What difference does it make?
Well a King has to know these things. (It's all about control)
whats the speed of an unladen swallow. ( you can't have that gun it shoots too fast)
african or European (Assault rifle or hunting rifle)
What difference does it make?
Well a King has to know these things. (It's all about control)
Warrigal
SF VIP
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
Monty Python logic and humour is appropriate when considering the mentality of gun culture.
It is totally bizarre to the uninitiated.
It is totally bizarre to the uninitiated.
SifuPhil
R.I.P. With Us In Spirit Only
- Location
- Pennsylvania, USA
... yet like most good humor it is based mainly upon fact and truth ...
Is "Banning" Effective?
Can "banning" private possession of any tangible material or object really be effective in pursuing some "purpose"? Controlled substances are banned, and therefore presumably unobtainable; yet, we fight a "war on drugs" continuously. Consumable alcohol was "banned", that one created a near-second civil war. Firearms, then. Many types are already banned in various jurisdictions, yet those same jurisdictions "enjoy" some warped benefit: the highest crime rates. Would their crime rates soar even higher if the bans were lifted?
I've mulled this over for years. Given an individual who, for whatever reason, chooses to lethally attack another individual, and further given that this criminal has at his/her disposal, a group of tools capable of lethal attack on another, a firearm, club, knife, screwdriver, shovel, vehicle: would the crime not be committed if the firearm were removed from the "mix"? imp
Can "banning" private possession of any tangible material or object really be effective in pursuing some "purpose"? Controlled substances are banned, and therefore presumably unobtainable; yet, we fight a "war on drugs" continuously. Consumable alcohol was "banned", that one created a near-second civil war. Firearms, then. Many types are already banned in various jurisdictions, yet those same jurisdictions "enjoy" some warped benefit: the highest crime rates. Would their crime rates soar even higher if the bans were lifted?
I've mulled this over for years. Given an individual who, for whatever reason, chooses to lethally attack another individual, and further given that this criminal has at his/her disposal, a group of tools capable of lethal attack on another, a firearm, club, knife, screwdriver, shovel, vehicle: would the crime not be committed if the firearm were removed from the "mix"? imp
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
Hmmm. Actually the more I read, the more I understand Monty Python, and the less I understand other things.
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
IMO, Imp, it is about black humour, aka "Theatre of the Absurd," a time honoured satirical/ironic method of poking fun at or exposing various societal peculiarities. Still illegal in some repressive nations, ie Iran. I suspect that to many on both sides of the gun issue, the situation has it's absurdities.
fureverywhere
beloved friend who will always be with us in spiri
- Location
- Northern NJ, USA
Something that illustrates where we are. A group in Newark was trying to roust up spirit just for today. Just for twenty four hours no murder. The first shooting at 9am, the second at 12. Is that sad or what?
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
Heartbreaking Fur.
Government Double-Standard
So long as government reserves the right to "make war" against it's enemies, as well as reserves the right to make and have firearms, which it can issue to it's citizens as Soldiers representing "their country" (or is it their government?), and force them to use such issue weaponry to kill others, as well as being maimed and killed themselves, while denying it's citizenry at large the right to possess those same firearms, is to me, laughable, at best. Despicable, as worse. Such citizenry constitute subjects, not citizens. imp
So long as government reserves the right to "make war" against it's enemies, as well as reserves the right to make and have firearms, which it can issue to it's citizens as Soldiers representing "their country" (or is it their government?), and force them to use such issue weaponry to kill others, as well as being maimed and killed themselves, while denying it's citizenry at large the right to possess those same firearms, is to me, laughable, at best. Despicable, as worse. Such citizenry constitute subjects, not citizens. imp
Shalimar
SF VIP
- Location
- Vancouver Island Canada
Hmm. With or without guns, and this Canuck makes no secret of her antigun stance, I believe we are all to some degree "subjects" regardless. Perhaps increasing transparency in some areas may offset the secrecy in others. Power always flourishes best in the dark.
We are certainly not in Jersey.