What’s the likelihood that we see civil unrest soon?

[hndog609]

Anyone familiar with the "actual terminology" should recognize that it derives from the German STG, not from American Democrats, and that contemporary usage includes semi-auto variants marketed for civilians. If you do not approve that usage, then don't use it. But you do not get to dictate contemporary usage of other people. Bottom line is blaming Democrats for contemporary usage(including usage of manufacturers) is ignorantly hateful, nutjob behavior.

Apparently you have a pretty strong political defense point set up here. Let's recap.

The root argument is based in my making a distinction. There is no opinion or need of political affiliation to make this distinction, only honest understanding of the subject matter. An "assault rifle" is a term with an actual definitional criteria. If X does not meet that criteria it is not an assault rifle.

Now with that absolutely non-opinion apolitical statement made we come to assault "weapon". This portmanteau is generally considered to be the creation of the rabid gun control advocate Josh Sugarman. It's creation was steeped in intentional deception from the start.

Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi automatic assault weapons anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. - Josh Sugarmann

The terminology started as a left leaning use of wordage for the express use in advancing gun control. The scope of their definition is such that taking a "normal" rifle action out of one stock and putting it in another can change it into an "assault weapon".

The confusing thing to me is you don't seem ignorant on firearms but are reticent to call a spade a spade here.

 

[Vol Main]

Apparently you have a pretty strong political defense point set up here. Let's recap.

The root argument is based in my making a distinction. There is no opinion or need of political affiliation to make this distinction, only honest understanding of the subject matter. An "assault rifle" is a term with an actual definitional criteria. If X does not meet that criteria it is not an assault rifle.

Now with that absolutely non-opinion apolitical statement made we come to assault "weapon". This portmanteau is generally considered to be the creation of the rabid gun control advocate Josh Sugarman. It's creation was steeped in intentional deception from the start.

Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi automatic assault weapons anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. - Josh Sugarmann

The terminology started as a left leaning use of wordage for the express use in advancing gun control. The scope of their definition is such that taking a "normal" rifle action out of one stock and putting it in another can change it into an "assault weapon".

The confusing thing to me is you don't seem ignorant on firearms but are reticent to call a spade a spade here.

Hold the phone, hound dog. This beef began with my objecting to another poster blaming Democrats for sullying gun owners by referring to semi-automatic civilian derivatives of military "assault rifles" as "assault rifles." They are called that because that is what they are, minus the fully auto selection. Technically, they are derivatives of assault rifles, variants of assault rifles, directly derived from assault rifles, so they are commonly called assault rifles in contemporary usage. That phrase was coined by Germans, not Democrats. I can assure you that usage existed before and separately from gun control advocates seizing upon it in confusion typical of them. The idea that it started for the purpose of sullying gun owners is just another example of poor me, got to blame somebody to hate somebody attitude. And I think you are spouting any bull hock you can think up to further that agenda. You even went to a list that included short barreled shotguns while poor mouthing the manufacturer of my rifle who labeled it an assault rifle on the box. You don't care that it was used by the manufacturer of a gun I bought back in the late 80s when semi-autos were legal, before all of the terrible mass murders. Look it. I get that a lot of gun control type individuals do not know much if anything about guns. Apparently, a lot of gun advocates do not know much about them either. Why don't you find somebody using the word clip instead of magazine and wear out that distinction until you feel better?

 

[hog88]

Hold the phone, hound dog. This beef began with my objecting to another poster blaming Democrats for sullying gun owners by referring to semi-automatic civilian derivatives of military "assault rifles" as "assault rifles." They are called that because that is what they are, minus the fully auto selection. They are variants of assault rifles, directly derived from assault rifles, and they are commonly called assault rifles in contemporary usage. I can assure you that usage existed before and separately from gun control advocates seizing upon it in confusion typical of them. The idea that it started for the purpose of sullying gun owners is just another example of poor me, got to blame somebody to hate somebody attitude. And I think you are spouting any bull hock you can think up to further that agenda. You even went to a list that included short barreled shotguns while poor mouthing the manufacturer of my rifle who labeled it an assault rifle on the box. You don't care that it was used by the manufacturer of a gun I bought back in the late 80s when semi-autos were legal, before all of the terrible mass murders. Look it. I get that a lot of gun control type individuals do not know much if anything about guns. Apparently, a lot of gun advocate do not know much about them either. Why don't you find somebody using the word clip instead of magazine and wear out that distinction until you feel better?

Does it really matter what term is used unless it is being used to scare people into supporting a ban? The label makes zero difference in the function or capability, call them super blaster lead slingers and it still changes nothing.

 

[hndog609]

Hold the phone, hound dog. This beef began with my objecting to another poster blaming Democrats for sullying gun owners by referring to semi-automatic civilian derivatives of military "assault rifles" as "assault rifles." They are called that because that is what they are, minus the fully auto selection. Technically, they are derivatives of assault rifles, variants of assault rifles, directly derived from assault rifles, so they are commonly called assault rifles in contemporary usage. That phrase was coined by Germans, not Democrats. I can assure you that usage existed before and separately from gun control advocates seizing upon it in confusion typical of them. The idea that it started for the purpose of sullying gun owners is just another example of poor me, got to blame somebody to hate somebody attitude. And I think you are spouting any bull hock you can think up to further that agenda. You even went to a list that included short barreled shotguns while poor mouthing the manufacturer of my rifle who labeled it an assault rifle on the box. You don't care that it was used by the manufacturer of a gun I bought back in the late 80s when semi-autos were legal, before all of the terrible mass murders. Look it. I get that a lot of gun control type individuals do not know much if anything about guns. Apparently, a lot of gun advocates do not know much about them either. Why don't you find somebody using the word clip instead of magazine and wear out that distinction until you feel better?

Ah...so definitions are on X/Y and continuums I see. I've seen that before. Carry on.

 

[Vol Main]

Ah...so definitions are on X/Y and continuums I see. I've seen that before. Carry on.

Well, you might not think so, but there are other things going on in the world besides liberal Democrats trying to rain on your parade.

"Working replicas of the Nazis' storm rifle, widely considered to be the world's first assault rifle, are now being produced in the U.S." They are semi-automatic, and guess what the manufacturer in Georgia is calling them.

The Nazis' assault rifle now made in America

 

[1vol8]

Well, you might not think so, but there are other things going on in the world besides liberal Democrats trying to rain on your parade.

"Working replicas of the Nazis' storm rifle, widely considered to be the world's first assault rifle, are now being produced in the U.S." They are semi-automatic, and guess what the manufacturer in Georgia is calling them.

The Nazis' assault rifle now made in America

What you were failing to realize is I was never talking about anywhere other than the USA. Those Democrats have no idea what the hell you’re talking about now. Just in case you haven’t noticed we are not German. We are not in Germany. And our politicians are not German. Therefore all that wasted breath has nothing to do with the reason why anti-gunners HERE call them assault weapons. When they refer to a magazine as a clip, or a cartridge as a bullet, they are ignorant to anything gun related.So what the hell would make you think that they’re educated enough to copy ancient Germany? They call them assault weapons because it sounds scary to people that don’t know any better. It’s a simple as that

 

[hndog609]

Well, you might not think so, but there are other things going on in the world besides liberal Democrats trying to rain on your parade.

"Working replicas of the Nazis' storm rifle, widely considered to be the world's first assault rifle, are now being produced in the U.S." They are semi-automatic, and guess what the manufacturer in Georgia is calling them.

The Nazis' assault rifle now made in America

See the underlined in your post? This is confirmation of the the political bias I alluded to earlier.* My post was absolutely apolitical other than my reference to Josh Sugarman, his basically inventing the term "assault weapon" as now used in this country and the unambiguous (including direct quote) intent in doing so.

I understand what an homage is to the OG. If you must put your mind in a place where the idea of definitional distinction takes on meaning for you please avail yourself of a real, genuine, definitionally correct and unregistered "assault rifle", walk up to an ATF agent and regale him about how, you know, "assault rifle" semi-auto same-same.

*Edit-I understand you've had a more politically based argument ongoing with another poster so I get there can be some conflation. This doesn't change the fact you very much appear to be shading your argument politically.

 

[Vol Main]

hndog609 *Edit-I understand you've had a more politically based argument ongoing with another poster so I get there can be some conflation. This doesn't change the fact you very much appear to be shading your argument politically.

Oh poor you. Poor you! You are a right winger and therefore so put upon by shaded political arguments! You cannot stop. lol

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Asked and answered.
more than 22 rounds in 5 seconds

Says who?

 

[Vol Main]

hndog609 *Edit-I understand you've had a more politically based argument ongoing with another poster so I get there can be some conflation. This doesn't change the fact you very much appear to be shading your argument politically.

Oh poor you. Poor you! You are a right winger and therefore so put upon by shaded political arguments! Ridiculous. You cannot stop. lol

 

[hndog609]

hndog609 *Edit-I understand you've had a more politically based argument ongoing with another poster so I get there can be some conflation. This doesn't change the fact you very much appear to be shading your argument politically.

Oh poor you. Poor you! You are a right winger and therefore so put upon by shaded political arguments! You cannot stop. lol

Ah, so I'm trying to avoid the overtly political in an honest attempt to avoid that becoming what steers the conversation and you double down on doing that very thing. Clearly there's no point in honest engagement and thus ends our conversation. Stay safe out there.

 

[luthervol]

Says who?

Me.

I'm throwing those numbers out there to show how easy it would be.
Have a National Fire Arms Panel with a mix of 9 members. They can negotiate and compromise.

 

[hog88]

Me.

I'm throwing those numbers out there to show how easy it would be.
Have a National Fire Arms Panel with a mix of 9 members. They can negotiate and compromise.

No.

 

[Vol Main]

Ah, so I'm trying to avoid the overtly political in an honest attempt to avoid that becoming what steers the conversation and you double down on doing that very thing. Clearly there's no point in honest engagement and thus ends our conversation. Stay safe out there.

So, you are being overtly political in an effort to support an overtly political position, to avoid being overtly political? Then you call that being honest, while thinking that there is something wrong with my staying on topic. You use a government list for defining assault rifles that includes sawed off shotguns, and you are impugning the honesty of my posts? As Mo said to Curly Joe, "Be careful!"

 

[Rickyvol77]

Me.

I'm throwing those numbers out there to show how easy it would be.
Have a National Fire Arms Panel with a mix of 9 members. They can negotiate and compromise.

Lmao but your opinion is ignorant on the subject

 

[luthervol]

x = 22
y = 5

 

[luthervol]

No.

Lmao but your opinion is ignorant on the subject

Rational and reasonable is obviously seen as ignorant by gun nuts.
If you think about it, how could it be any other way?

 

[hog88]

Rational and reasonable is obviously seen as ignorant by gun nuts.
If you think about it, how could it be any other way?

There is no reason for any discussion or compromise. So no to any of your lunatic suggestions.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Rational and reasonable is obviously seen as ignorant by gun nuts.
If you think about it, how could it be any other way?

You are actually an anti gun nut. Believers who have upheld a sworn oath by the Constitution and actually understand law know what the Founding fathers believed in and the courts have upheld. You are simply a public school teacher who lets his irrational emotional beliefs undermine any critical thinking on the subject. Which is why your opinion on this doesn’t and won’t ever matter

 

[luthervol]

There is no reason for any discussion or compromise. So no to any of your lunatic suggestions.

Exhibit A (where has "69 been by the way - he was the original Exhibit A)

 

[hog88]

Exhibit A (where has "69 been by the way - he was the original Exhibit A)

2A says we don't even have to entertain a discussion or compromise. Once you get enough support to amend the constitution then yeah, discussions will be necessary.

 

[luthervol]

You are actually an anti gun nut. Believers who have upheld a sworn oath by the Constitution and actually understand law know what the Founding fathers believed in and the courts have upheld. You are simply a public school teacher who lets his irrational emotional beliefs undermine any critical thinking on the subject. Which is why your opinion on this doesn’t and won’t ever matter

Exhibit B (Call it the Brain Dead Zone - knows enough to think he knows it all, but not enough to realize he knows very little)

 

[luthervol]

2A says we don't even have to entertain a discussion or compromise. Once you get enough support to amend the constitution then yeah, discussions will be necessary.

Seems there has been plenty of discussion and compromise on 2A without an amendment - curious)

 

[hog88]

Seems there has been plenty of discussion and compromise on 2A without an amendment - curious)

No, there has been no compromise, there has only been attempts to end run the constitution and thankfully most have been blocked by the courts.

 

[Rickyvol77]

Exhibit B (Call it the Brain Dead Zone - knows enough to think he knows it all, but not enough to realize he knows very little)

Well one of us has studied constitutional law and actually applied it in actual real life court cases and the other one babysits middle schoolers and teaches mediocrity mixed with emotional personal political points.