Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTOP)   So just what the heck is an "assault weapon," anyway? A clip? A magazine? Here's your handy-dandy gun glossary so you can sound infromed for the next flamewar   (wtop.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, assault weapons, flame wars, semiautomatic firearms, design change, private ownership, target shooting, Uzi  
•       •       •

10299 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2013 at 9:53 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



694 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-01-25 02:28:39 PM  
dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?
 
2013-01-25 02:29:39 PM  

FlashHarry: i'm saying that you don't need an AR.


need is not a prerequisite in the context of enumerated rights.
 
2013-01-25 02:29:50 PM  

FlashHarry: i'm saying that you don't need an AR. that was my point. try to keep up.


If I have an AR, which I can use for sport, self defense, hunting, why do I need a more specialized firearm that may less customizable or require more expensive ammo? That is, if ammo or customization is my goal.

Your argument basically boils down to 'stop liking what I don't like"

You don't need an account on fark, but here we are.
 
2013-01-25 02:30:52 PM  

vygramul: CPennypacker: vygramul: CPennypacker: Like limiting magazine size won't make a difference because it takes 0 seconds to reload, but we can't limit magazine size because x bullets in the magazine may not be enough to defend your home from murdering rapist zombie looters.

Or banning guns won't do anything because the maniacs will just use knives or hammers, which are just as deadly, but don't ban guns because I need them to defend myself, even though I have a knife and a hammer.

I bet the number of times someone needed more than 10 rounds to defend his home is probably fewer than the times someone was able to intervene during a magazine swap.  But the cannibalizing of arguments works both ways.  "You're going to be too scared to shoot back," and, "You can just tackle the guy with the gun when he swaps magazines," seem pretty contradictory in premise.

Banning all guns will do something.  Banning a small subset of guns won't.  Banning high-capacity magazines will probably never do anything for a variety of reasons.  Maybe a ban 30 years ago would, by now, matter.  But between the glut of mags and 3-D printing in the relatively near future, magazine bans are simply unlikely to matter much.

I'd rather people not ban something that is only responsible for 3% of murders (if that) and then declare victory.  It's insulting.

I'm OK with reducing murders 3% if the only cost is that you have to reload two more times at the range.

If it would reduce murders 3%, sure.  Notice that the 1998 shooting with a 50-round magazine happened during the AWB when high-cap mags were banned?  It's like banning Coke but not Pepsi.  You probably won't have a measurable impact at all.  In fact, it might be counter-productive because you might set up an incentive to use more useful weapons.  An assault rifle might be less effective for shootings than a pair of handguns.  after all, despite this being the 50th anniversary of civilian access to the AR-15, of the top-11 deadliest shootings, the ...


Hey I'm actually with you guys on the Assault weapons ban thing. I think we should restrict/regulate the potentially dangerous aspects of guns and gun ownership instead of the types of guns sold or how they look.
 
2013-01-25 02:31:24 PM  

CPennypacker: You could get attacked by a MiG29, I guess we shouldn't limit civilian access to Surface to Air missiles either.

And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there.


I'll say that I support privately SATMs the first time we have an airborne attack. Yeah, it's too late for the 1st wave of people killed, but it's a decent start
 
2013-01-25 02:31:43 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?


It's not the last time but anytime. There's that feeling in the air.
 
2013-01-25 02:31:44 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper: FlashHarry: i would imagine he (and it's always a he)

No it isn't

you found one girl who did it 34 years ago. i stand corrected.


I didn't *FIND* her. She's the canonical teen school shooter: She did it first. They even wrote a song about her.
 
2013-01-25 02:32:16 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of guns are hidden or buried in the country.


It might be counted in the millions.
 
2013-01-25 02:32:28 PM  

pedrop357: Your argument basically boils down to 'stop liking what I don't like"


that's asinine. for the hundredth time:  i don't want to ban your AR. i just think you can still use it for sport, self defense, hunting... whatever... with a 10-round magazine.
 
2013-01-25 02:32:53 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?


How about every time? Every time a large number of people start looting, burning, etc. there's an extraordinarily high chance that a person may face multiple attackers.

If the police need 'high capacity magazines' to deal with looters, rioters, etc. so does every person in the path of those looters, rioters, etc.
 
2013-01-25 02:33:09 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?


About 20 years ago.
 
2013-01-25 02:33:21 PM  

pedrop357: CPennypacker: You could get attacked by a MiG29, I guess we shouldn't limit civilian access to Surface to Air missiles either.

And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there.

I'll say that I support privately SATMs the first time we have an airborne attack. Yeah, it's too late for the 1st wave of people killed, but it's a decent start


Tell that to the poor bastard killed by the horrible airborne attack you allowed to happen by not letting him have SAMs
 
2013-01-25 02:33:36 PM  

FlashHarry: when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest


Seems to be about every 5 years or so. Let's see - Ruby Ridge, Waco, Katrina, LA riots since about 1990. Whether they use semi auto or manual action firearms is irrelevent to the discussion.
 
2013-01-25 02:33:47 PM  

FlashHarry: that's asinine. for the hundredth time: i don't want to ban your AR. i just think you can still use it for sport, self defense, hunting... whatever... with a 10-round magazine.


Than, why the talk about not needing an AR?

Right now I can use it for all that stuff with my 30 round magazines.
 
2013-01-25 02:34:08 PM  

FlashHarry: Oblio13: FlashHarry: ... THEY'RE POLICE. THAT'S THEIR JOB...

There are long, long moments between when a crime occurs and the police can arrive to save you, even assuming that there's a way to summon them and that they don't choke on their donuts or wet themselves. During the critical phase of violence, you are on your own.

but you can defend yourself with a shotgun, a 10-round semi-auto handgun or whatever. you don't need an AR15 with a 30-round clip.

nobody is talking about taking ALL guns. hell, i'm not even talking about banning "assault weapons," as it has been pointed out to me on many a fark thread that they're really just regular hunting rifles dressed up so people can run around playing army. i'm saying that you can have a 10-round magazine that LOOKS like a 30-round magazine, so you can still pretend to be a green beret at the shooting range.


What's to stop a criminals from modifying the magazine?
 
2013-01-25 02:34:30 PM  

Deep Contact: There's that feeling in the air.


i swear to god, the only reason there's "that feeling in the air" is because there's a democrat in the white house.

we had this same "feeling in the air" when clinton was in the WH. all those militias in michigan and idaho. shiat like that.

it's pure rightwing paranoia fantasy.
 
2013-01-25 02:34:37 PM  

CPennypacker: And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there


That should be easy to assess.

Considering the number of households that have children and guns in them.

You would have to eliminate all scenarios where a child grabbed a gun from a drawer or safe and focus on the ones where the child physically disarmed the parent and shot them with their own weapon. Seing as how if there are CCW allowed in schools the CCW holder would have their weapon on them.

You would also have to eliminate all cases of the parent sleeping and being shot by the child because I don;t think teachers or administartors are allowed to sleep on the job.
 
2013-01-25 02:35:51 PM  

pedrop357: Than, why the talk about not needing an AR?


i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.
 
2013-01-25 02:36:08 PM  

FlashHarry: pedrop357: Your argument basically boils down to 'stop liking what I don't like"

that's asinine. for the hundredth time:  i don't want to ban your AR. i just think you can still use it for sport, self defense, hunting... whatever... with a 10-round magazine.


You can do the same with a 1 round magazine. Arbitrary lines in the sand, my friend.
 
2013-01-25 02:36:37 PM  

dittybopper: FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?

About 20 years ago.


I should also point out that I don't own anything that has a capacity of more than 7 rounds, and that's a .22 bolt action. In fact, the gun I shoot the most is a flintlock long rifle.

So no, not really a SHTF prepper.

/Keeps a few things around for stuff like extended power outages, that sort of thing.
 
2013-01-25 02:36:47 PM  

CPennypacker: Tell that to the poor bastard killed by the horrible airborne attack you allowed to happen by not letting him have SAMs


I can compromise. You can have all the SAMs, AAMs, etc. you want as long as any dust, debris, shockwaves, etc. stay on your property. You can even shoot down your own aircraft provided everything stays on your property.

Same goes with ICBMs, and any personally owned nuclear weapons.
 
2013-01-25 02:37:02 PM  

FlashHarry: Deep Contact: There's that feeling in the air.

i swear to god, the only reason there's "that feeling in the air" is because there's a democrat in the white house.

we had this same "feeling in the air" when clinton was in the WH. all those militias in michigan and idaho. shiat like that.

it's pure rightwing paranoia fantasy.


Didn't have that feeling when clinton was pres. Have a bad feeling now.
 
2013-01-25 02:37:27 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, without high-capacity magazines, shall not be infringed.
 
2013-01-25 02:37:32 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: What's to stop a criminals from modifying the magazine?


www.washingtonpost.com

most mass shooters obtain weapons legally.

but to your question, i suppose, theoretically, it's possible that one may modify a magazine. then again, murder is illegal yet there are still murders. should murder therefore be legal?
 
2013-01-25 02:37:44 PM  

FlashHarry: i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.



Ahh I see, you're an asshole. You think it's all symbolism and looks.
 
2013-01-25 02:37:47 PM  

Giltric: CPennypacker: And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there

That should be easy to assess.

Considering the number of households that have children and guns in them.

You would have to eliminate all scenarios where a child grabbed a gun from a drawer or safe and focus on the ones where the child physically disarmed the parent and shot them with their own weapon. Seing as how if there are CCW allowed in schools the CCW holder would have their weapon on them.

You would also have to eliminate all cases of the parent sleeping and being shot by the child because I don;t think teachers or administartors are allowed to sleep on the job.


By all means, eliminate any relevant data that doesn't back up your point of view. Guns are super safe if we ignore all of the people who have been shot.
 
2013-01-25 02:38:20 PM  

FlashHarry: dittybopper:

Riots, civil unrest, that sort of thing.

jaysus. another SHTF prepper?

when was the last time we had riots and civil unrest that required the civilian use of high-capacity magazines?


Koreatown, april 29th, 1992.

Instances of DGU don't get as much attention as the spree killers do. I posted a video about upthread by ColionNoir.
 
2013-01-25 02:38:25 PM  

FlashHarry: murder is illegal yet there are still murders. should murder therefore be legal?


You're confusing the harm with the means. try again.
 
2013-01-25 02:39:28 PM  

CPennypacker: By all means, eliminate any relevant data that doesn't back up your point of view. Guns are super safe if we ignore all of the people who have been shot.


Unless we're calling for or encouraging teachers/staff to keep their gun in an unsecured drawer, that data is irrelevant.
 
2013-01-25 02:39:28 PM  

FlashHarry: pedrop357: Than, why the talk about not needing an AR?

i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.


You know what the problem with that idea is?

Cops won't know the difference.
 
2013-01-25 02:39:47 PM  

pedrop357: CPennypacker: Tell that to the poor bastard killed by the horrible airborne attack you allowed to happen by not letting him have SAMs

I can compromise. You can have all the SAMs, AAMs, etc. you want as long as any dust, debris, shockwaves, etc. stay on your property. You can even shoot down your own aircraft provided everything stays on your property.

Same goes with ICBMs, and any personally owned nuclear weapons.


But what if the Mig attacks him when he's walking around town? Why do you hate freedom?
 
2013-01-25 02:39:48 PM  

pedrop357: FlashHarry: i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.


Ahh I see, you're an asshole. You think it's all symbolism and looks.


i've been told repeatedly on this forum that there is NO DIFFERENCE between an "assault rifle" and a regular rifle other than cosmetics.

or are you saying there is?

i'll refrain from calling you an asshole, though. it's a pity you had to stoop to that.
 
2013-01-25 02:40:53 PM  

pedrop357: CPennypacker: By all means, eliminate any relevant data that doesn't back up your point of view. Guns are super safe if we ignore all of the people who have been shot.

Unless we're calling for or encouraging teachers/staff to keep their gun in an unsecured drawer, that data is irrelevant.


Unless the gun is surgically grafted to the carrier's body then it is relevant. They are still people. And people are, generally, idiots.
 
2013-01-25 02:41:09 PM  

FlashHarry: StoPPeRmobile: What's to stop a criminals from modifying the magazine?

[www.washingtonpost.com image 580x464]

most mass shooters obtain weapons legally.

but to your question, i suppose, theoretically, it's possible that one may modify a magazine. then again, murder is illegal yet there are still murders. should murder therefore be legal?


Murder is legal. Cops do it. Military does it...
 
2013-01-25 02:41:14 PM  

FlashHarry: we had this same "feeling in the air" when clinton was in the WH.


Nah, this is a little different. This feeling is more do with the crappy economy and the governent's inability to work in any meaningful way. Folks are pidgenholed into either hearless neo-cons or moonbat liberals and then we wonder why no one likes to work together.

When the Congress has not even passed a damn budget for the last 4 years, you have to start wondering when the unraveling will begin. Hopefully never, but you just never know.
 
2013-01-25 02:41:26 PM  

CPennypacker: But what if the Mig attacks him when he's walking around town? Why do you hate freedom?


I implied that the use of it has to stay on his property. This is inline with people making explosives and other things and not being able to just blow up stuff or shoot guns in the middle of the street.

People could carry their SAMs with them if they want, but any use outside of self-defense is serious crime.
 
2013-01-25 02:41:51 PM  

CPennypacker: Giltric: CPennypacker: And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there

That should be easy to assess.

Considering the number of households that have children and guns in them.

You would have to eliminate all scenarios where a child grabbed a gun from a drawer or safe and focus on the ones where the child physically disarmed the parent and shot them with their own weapon. Seing as how if there are CCW allowed in schools the CCW holder would have their weapon on them.

You would also have to eliminate all cases of the parent sleeping and being shot by the child because I don;t think teachers or administartors are allowed to sleep on the job.

By all means, eliminate any relevant data that doesn't back up your point of view. Guns are super safe if we ignore all of the people who have been shot.


Well trying to compare the 2 outright would be like Top Gear comparing a Prius to an M3 by racing top speed around a race track to show what bad gas mileage a Prius gets
 
2013-01-25 02:42:13 PM  

FlashHarry:

i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.


I'll speak slowly, too. I don't want people so uninformed that they don't even use the correct terminology to reinterpret the Bill of Needs - oops, sorry, the Bill of Rights.
 
2013-01-25 02:42:59 PM  

pedrop357: CPennypacker: But what if the Mig attacks him when he's walking around town? Why do you hate freedom?

I implied that the use of it has to stay on his property. This is inline with people making explosives and other things and not being able to just blow up stuff or shoot guns in the middle of the street.

People could carry their SAMs with them if they want, but any use outside of self-defense is serious crime.


I see, so you're OK with people carrying around surface to air missiles as long as they only use them in self defense. Just establishing baseline.
 
2013-01-25 02:43:19 PM  

FlashHarry: i've been told repeatedly on this forum that there is NO DIFFERENCE between an "assault rifle" and a regular rifle other than cosmetics.

or are you saying there is?

i'll refrain from calling you an asshole, though. it's a pity you had to stoop to that.



It is largely cosmetics, though some smaller stature shooters prefer the collapsing stock, and shooters like the pistol grip because it can help deal with recoil. The functional differences are minimal or nonexistent.

The asshole remarks comes from your 'play soldier' comment.
 
2013-01-25 02:43:55 PM  

Giltric: CPennypacker: Giltric: CPennypacker: And before we allow concealed carry in school maybe we should assess the risk vs reward there

That should be easy to assess.

Considering the number of households that have children and guns in them.

You would have to eliminate all scenarios where a child grabbed a gun from a drawer or safe and focus on the ones where the child physically disarmed the parent and shot them with their own weapon. Seing as how if there are CCW allowed in schools the CCW holder would have their weapon on them.

You would also have to eliminate all cases of the parent sleeping and being shot by the child because I don;t think teachers or administartors are allowed to sleep on the job.

By all means, eliminate any relevant data that doesn't back up your point of view. Guns are super safe if we ignore all of the people who have been shot.

Well trying to compare the 2 outright would be like Top Gear comparing a Prius to an M3 by racing top speed around a race track to show what bad gas mileage a Prius gets


Then its not really a valid comparison at all then
 
2013-01-25 02:44:24 PM  

CPennypacker: I see, so you're OK with people carrying around surface to air missiles as long as they only use them in self defense. Just establishing baseline.


yes, just like guns. I don't support people carrying guns around to commit crimes with, or shoot in areas where it's illegal to shoot.
 
2013-01-25 02:44:34 PM  

FlashHarry: i've been told repeatedly on this forum that there is NO DIFFERENCE between an "assault rifle" and a regular rifle other than cosmetics.


No you haven't. You've been told there is not difference between an "assault weapon" and a regular rifle other than cosmetics.

There is a big difference between "assault rifles" and regular rifles other than cosmetics: Assault rifles are capable of full-automatic fire, and regular rifles and "assault weapons" aren't.
 
2013-01-25 02:44:42 PM  

Oblio13: FlashHarry:

i'll speak slowly: i'm talking about not needing an AR with a 30-round clip. i'm saying you can still play soldier with a 10-round clip that's made to look like a 30-round clip.

I'll speak slowly, too. I don't want people so uninformed that they don't even use the correct terminology to reinterpret the Bill of Needs - oops, sorry, the Bill of Rights.


oooh! i said clip instead of magazine! oooh! my point is invalid.

i've actually been VERY careful to use the right terminology so far. yes, i slipped there. i apologize if you were offended, champ.
 
2013-01-25 02:45:29 PM  

pedrop357: It is largely cosmetics, though some smaller stature shooters prefer the collapsing stock, and shooters like the pistol grip because it can help deal with recoil. The functional differences are minimal or nonexistent.

The asshole remarks comes from your 'play soldier' comment.


well then if it's just cosmetics, why do you need a rifle that looks like a military weapon, asshole?
 
2013-01-25 02:46:04 PM  
..other than to "play soldier," that is.
 
2013-01-25 02:47:05 PM  

HeadLever: FlashHarry: we had this same "feeling in the air" when clinton was in the WH.

Nah, this is a little different. This feeling is more do with the crappy economy and the governent's inability to work in any meaningful way. Folks are pidgenholed into either hearless neo-cons or moonbat liberals and then we wonder why no one likes to work together.

When the Congress has not even passed a damn budget for the last 4 years, you have to start wondering when the unraveling will begin. Hopefully never, but you just never know.


Devauluing the dollar benefits the one with dollar debt.
 
2013-01-25 02:48:38 PM  

FlashHarry: well then if it's just cosmetics, why do you need a rifle that looks like a military weapon, asshole?


Largely cosmetics. We don't go after those guns because of the looks, the gun control groups do. They choose a series of features that look scary to them and claim those make the gun more deadly when they don't.

We like some of the features like pistol grips, collapsing stocks, barrel shrouds as they make our gun a little easier to shoot for smaller people, for people who want better dissipation of recoil, or for people who like to shoot at the range without burning their hands(s). The differences in terms of deadliness or capability ARE NIL and the difference between 'assault weapon' and 'semi-auto rifle' is a series of largely cosmetic (maybe aesthetic?) features.
 
2013-01-25 02:48:44 PM  

FlashHarry: i've actually been VERY careful to use the right terminology so far. yes, i slipped there. i apologize if you were offended, champ.


He might be offended but I am not...at least you learn from your mistakes in other threads instead of posting the same talking points of derp derp militia derp derp stuff over and over after it's been dissected and explained.
 
2013-01-25 02:48:50 PM  

dittybopper: No you haven't. You've been told there is not difference between an "assault weapon" and a regular rifle other than cosmetics.

There is a big difference between "assault rifles" and regular rifles other than cosmetics: Assault rifles are capable of full-automatic fire, and regular rifles and "assault weapons" aren't.


i stand corrected.

if the differences are ONLY cosmetic, why do you need an "assault weapon" other than to "play soldier?"

and if it is in fact to play soldier, then why do you need more than 10 rounds in your magazine?

i mean, i get it. guns are cool. as i mentioned, i'm on the lookout for a .303 SMLE myself. i enjoy shooting clays. i don't want to ban guns.
 
Displayed 50 of 694 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report