good guy with a gun stops kids from getting too noisy; newest shooting

Flex Plexico said:
and how would that make it a machine gun?


Machine guns are capable of sustained full auto fire and use a belt and or box fed system.

I’m not very deeply entrenched on either side. I like guns and have shot them before, but am in favor of common sense gun control
Click to expand...

I already pointed out US law definition of a machinegun.
 
VivaRevolution said:
No, but if that person is advocating for any position on the issue, they should be mocked as a know nothing.
Click to expand...

And that would be an ignorant thing to do. Use this thread topic or todays school shooting as an example: Someone misidentifying the weapon cannot possibly contribute to the discussion? You know that's bullshit. Calling something "automatic" when it's semi auto might show a lack of knowledge about firearms, but tells you nothing about the underline argument. An individual could very well have a good argument (on either side of the debate) while still not knowing the difference in ammunition types.

Now if it is a conversation in which these details matter, sure, language would be very important and mistakes should absolutely be pointed out. But more often not, cries of "you got that wrong, technically it's..." are just being used to shut down the conversation before it gets started.

That's my point here. The rifle being a "machine gun" or not has no relevance to the thread topic. It's only being mocked so that partisans can skip the meat of the debate. So what benefit is it?

I'm a lawyer. The war room discusses legal issues every day. Now picking any legal issue, would my contribution be better if I weighed in on the heart of the issue, or if I just singled out someone who used incorrect legal language, called them an idiot and yelled for the discussion to stop? Unless the specific language is relevant, then I'm just being a twat or trying to shut it down.

The reason this nation is so divided is because we aren't even taking the time to have a rational discussion and instead just dismiss opposition out of hand.

Suggesting that a person who got a technical spec wrong on a gun (whoops, apparently that only applies to vessel-mounted weapons, who knew!) can't have a political point, is fundamentally retarded. Take it even further like it is in this thread, and the entire opposing side can't have an argument because one of it's members got that spec wrong. It would be the equivalent of me calling you a moron and trying to end all discussion because I found a typo in a Howard Zinn book.
 
Last edited:
VivaRevolution said:
Well if a legal AK in the US meets this definition, then so does a stock piece of metal. Both just require a little bit of machining to become a fully automatic weapon.
Click to expand...

Im pretty sure "readily" doesnt means a stock piece of metal.

And considering the amount of AK-47s and AR-15s that are readily modified to fire full auto in the hands of cartels i wouldnt say it requires an industrial process to do so.
 
Rod1 said:
I already pointed out US law definition of a machinegun.
Click to expand...
Well I’ll need to backtrack to that when I get home to WiFi. Relying on one bar of lte now and shit is taking forever to load


In the meantime, peace to you and everybody.

Lately, I’ve been very careful to keep an open mind, and am not entrenched in any particular ideology
 
Rod1 said:
or can be readily restored to shoot,
Click to expand...

It's not classified as a class 3 firearm, which it would be if it was considered a machine gun.
 
Not a fan of guns, but I don’t think stricter gun laws are gonna change anything. America loves guns, that’s never gonna change, it is what it is.

Still feel much safer here than I have in many other countries I have traveled to.
 
Darkballs said:
And that would be an ignorant thing to do. Use this thread topic or todays school shooting as an example: Someone misidentifying the weapon cannot possibly contribute to the discussion? You know that's bullshit. Calling something "automatic" when it's semi auto might show a lack of knowledge about firearms, but tells you nothing about the underline argument. An individual could very well have a good argument (on either side of the debate) while still not knowing the difference in ammunition types.

Now if it is a conversation in which these details matter, sure, language would be very important and mistakes should absolutely be pointed out. But more often not, cries of "you got that wrong, technically it's..." are just being used to shut down the conversation before it gets started.

That's my point here. The rifle being a "machine gun" or not has no relevance to the thread topic. It's only being mocked so that partisans can skip the meat of the debate. So what benefit is it?

I'm a lawyer. The war room discusses legal issues every day. Now picking any legal issue, would my contribution be better if I weighed in on the heart of the issue, or if I just singled out someone who used incorrect legal language, called them an idiot and yelled for the discussion to stop? Unless the specific language is relevant, then I'm just being a twat or trying to shut it down.

The reason this nation is so divided is because we aren't even taking the time to have a rational discussion and instead just dismiss opposition out of hand.

Suggesting that a person who got a technical spec wrong on a gun (whoops, apparently that only applies to vessel-mounted weapons, who knew!) can't have a political point, is fundamentally retarded. Take it even further like it is in this thread, and the entire opposing side can't have an argument because one of it's members got that spec wrong. It would be the equivalent of me calling you a moron and trying to end all discussion because I found a typo in a Howard Zinn book.
Click to expand...

Right.

Does it really matter if he had shot them with an M-60(machine gun), Ak-47(assault rifle), a submachine gun,shotgun, AMR sniper rifle, or a crossbow?

The crux of the thread is that a person who clearly should have not had access to a weapon was able to easily obtain and injure and almost kill innocents due to lax gun laws and lax gun culture.
 
Rod1 said:
Im pretty sure "readily" doesnt means a stock piece of metal.

And considering the amount of AK-47s and AR-15s that are readily modified to fire full auto in the hands of cartels i wouldnt say it requires an industrial process to do so.
Click to expand...

Is fully auto modified rifles really the problem with the cartels?

I was under the impression they had military grade weapons.
 
Darkballs said:
And that would be an ignorant thing to do. Use this thread topic or todays school shooting as an example: Someone misidentifying the weapon cannot possibly contribute to the discussion? You know that's bullshit. Calling something "automatic" when it's semi auto might show a lack of knowledge about firearms, but tells you nothing about the underline argument. An individual could very well have a good argument (on either side of the debate) while still not knowing the difference in ammunition types.

Now if it is a conversation in which these details matter, sure, language would be very important and mistakes should absolutely be pointed out. But more often not, cries of "you got that wrong, technically it's..." are just being used to shut down the conversation before it gets started.

That's my point here. The rifle being a "machine gun" or not has no relevance to the thread topic. It's only being mocked so that partisans can skip the meat of the debate. So what benefit is it?

I'm a lawyer. The war room discusses legal issues every day. Now picking any legal issue, would my contribution be better if I weighed in on the heart of the issue, or if I just singled out someone who used incorrect legal language, called them an idiot and yelled for the discussion to stop? Unless the specific language is relevant, then I'm just being a twat or trying to shut it down.

The reason this nation is so divided is because we aren't even taking the time to have a rational discussion and instead just dismiss opposition out of hand.

Suggesting that a person who got a technical spec wrong on a gun (whoops, apparently that only applies to vessel-mounted weapons, who knew!) can't have a political point, is fundamentally retarded. Take it even further like it is in this thread, and the entire opposing side can't have an argument because one of it's members got that spec wrong. It would be the equivalent of me calling you a moron and trying to end all discussion because I found a typo in a Howard Zinn book.
Click to expand...

It's a fair enough point I guess, but I would hope you would concede that for the topic of guns, where regulatory language becomes key to the conversation, it is really important to have a basic understanding of guns, to have a informed opinion.

I think we have a handgun problem in this country, if anything. The fact that we spend so much time talking about rifles is amazing to me.
 
vengeful said:
Based on your ignorance of how to spell ignorant, your opinion on this matter isn't worth listening to according to your own criteria.
Click to expand...

Obviously not a typo, when it is spelled correctly in the next paragraph......
 
Rod1 said:
The classification system works independently of federal law.
Click to expand...

No machine gun made after may 19 1986 can be sold to the public. Yet here we are arguing over whether and AK which can still be manufactured and sold in the US is a machine gun......
 
Lowmanproblems said:
No machine gun made after may 19 1986 can be sold to the public. Yet here we are arguing over whether and AK which can still be manufactured and sold in the US is a machine gun......
Click to expand...

I stand corrected, it seems that "readily" means anything any idiot can do, like a "bump stock" (yet bump stock arent considered machine guns because technically the trigger is pressed repeatedly).
 
VivaRevolution said:
Is fully auto modified rifles really the problem with the cartels?

I was under the impression they had military grade weapons.
Click to expand...

Corruption is the main issues with cartels they lose most straight fights against trained soldiers.
 
Darkballs said:
We get it that you guy's have made very specific, unnecessary and arbitrary definitions of "semi-auto," "full-auto,"
Click to expand...

There is nothing arbitrary about semi auto and full auto... you guys are just fucking retarded
 
Rod1 said:
I stand corrected, it seems that "readily" means anything any idiot can do, like a "bump stock" (yet bump stock arent considered machine guns because technically the trigger is pressed repeatedly).
Click to expand...

Bump stocks are also uneccesary to achieve this type of pseudo full auto. All it's really doing is using the recoil of the gun to pull the trigger
 
oleDirtyBast4rd said:
Bump stocks are also uneccesary to achieve this type of pseudo full auto. All it's really doing is using the recoil of the gun to pull the trigger
Click to expand...

The law states that any add-on that allows a firearm to be able to fire more than one round per trigger pull is considered machinegun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

White Whale
International Mass shooting in Prague University several dead and dozens injured
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
5K
Anewt
Anewt

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,714
Messages
55,436,727
Members
174,775
Latest member
Ruckus245

Share this page

Back
Top