Obama backs assault weapons ban

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan

Ever run into a POed feral hog when out hunting? If so, you'd have all the reason you'd need to have one. Staring down a charging feral hog knowing you've got 4 shells in the tube to deal with it sucks.

And frankly, sometimes it's just fun to go shoot one. Sorry that's lost on you, but some people want to watch TV, some play video games, some drink, some smoke, some of us have fun going out and hanging up targets and taking a little target practice...

The funny thing is you and others apparently can't distinguish between the semi-auto lookalikes that are being villainized and the military grade auto weapons that are being used in the majority of the violent acts in Mexico.

You pull the trigger on one of these 'evil' assault weapons, you get one 'bang'. That's it. You have to pull the trigger each time to you want to discharge a round. But they look evil, and getting them banned sets the precedent among the anit-gunners that can be used to further ban additional guns through the court system. The Brady group has laid it out clearly, and has a close ally in Obama and another in his AG.

Ban these evil looking ones, then they can go after all semi-auto weapons (including hand guns) because they have the same rate of fire as the 'banned' assault weapons, and the courts have already ruled those illegal.

The progression continues until all firearms are banned.

But as others have already noted, the second amendment wasn't authored so I could go out and take down a feral hog, or defend my home in the case of a home invasion or buglary attempt.

It was enumerated so the people in this country have a check on out of control federal government, which is becoming more and more of a reality every day.

---

:lol at what you think I'm lost on.

Reading into your comment, I would guess you would draw the line between semi-automatic and automatic weapons. [I know that you can own machine guns with a special license; I suppose that applies to automatics in general.]

I thought one of the problems with "assault weapons" is that they can be easily converted into automatic weapons. I am curious if that is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spurster

:lol at what you think I'm lost on.

Reading into your comment, I would guess you would draw the line between semi-automatic and automatic weapons. [I know that you can own machine guns with a special license; I suppose that applies to automatics in general.]

I thought one of the problems with "assault weapons" is that they can be easily converted into automatic weapons. I am curious if that is true.

---

Correct, you can own auto weapons, but you have to go through everything short of a cavity search from the BATF to get the proper licensing (and pay like a $2500 licensing stamp fee for each weapon).

It's not easy to convert a semi to full auto. When they initially banned full auto weapon manufacturing, they worked with the manufacturers to resize parts in the critical areas necessary for the full auto mechanism to do its thing.

You'd have to be able to run down the parts to do it, or have enough machinery and expertise to custom build the parts yourself. In the case of the former (finding the parts), you'd still have to go through the same virtual cavity search from BATF. Some argue there's a black market for the equipment, but frankly, if you're going to that length a gun ban isn't going to stop you any way.

Same thing for machining the parts yourself. You're talking precision building components, some the size of a paper clip, that if done wrong would result in the gun blowing up in your face when you pull the trigger.

Again, the semi-autos that the anti-gunners hate that look like an M16 (the AR-15) or the AK-47 (WASR-10s and so forth) are one trigger pull, one bullet.

But the progression for the Brady Group and the anti-gunners like Rahm and Obama are that they can go after these weapons because they look evil to the uneducated (they don't realize they're semi-auto, so the anti-gunners equate them to the US military's M16 and the various foreign AK-47 users). Then when they get those banned, they can turn around and go after semi-auto hand guns because they use the same mechanisms and have the same firing capacity (x number of rounds per minute - never mind you'd have to change the magazine somewhere in there) as the already banned semi-auto rifles.

They also want to ban anything that has a magazine, under the argument that people don't need a gun that can shoot multiple rounds (because no one ever misses in a firefight :rolleyes). This idiotic argument is advanced even when studies show that the pros (cops, SWAT) on average only have one of every four rounds they fire in a firefight actually hit the target...

From there, we're down to revolvers and shotguns and hunting rifles. But their progression is that after the semi-autos are banned, they can say ban revolvers and rifles and shotguns that allow for multiple shots (which would be pretty much everything left). So then we're left with single shot rifles and shotguns. Hooray for the second amendment.

You don't need to have an assault weapon to be able drop someone dead cold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeChalupa

You don't need to have an assault weapon to be able drop someone dead cold.

---

An assault weapon is no more deadly than any other firearm you can legally purchase in this country...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeChalupa

You don't need to have an assault weapon to be able drop someone dead cold.

---

i agree. didn't that sunday school teacher use a suitcase to kill that kid. save yourselves samsonite!!!!