the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

. I got this from Tucker Carlson in the past few days, haven't checked it myself, but he said there was a so-called assault weapons ban for 10 years from '94-04 that was studied by the DoJ and it concluded there was no change in gun crime, so that's on example of a common sense gun law reform that had no effect.

That logic is flawed. There have been an increasing number of mass shootings with assault weapons Since the assault ban was lifted. You would have to argue that the increase was not due to lifting the ban.

The logical equivalent to Tucker's argument is that reinstating the assault weapons ban now would not decrease gun crime --because it didn't change anything when was instated from 94-04. However, that's fatalism. It proposes that we must live with the current crime rate. At any rate, there's no way to know the effect reinstating the ban would have. At worst, there would be no change. At best, there would be a reduction --no matter how small.

The other argument implied is that the current gun laws are sufficient. Ok, but does that mean they're successful? Which one of the recent shooters got his weapons illegally?

Steve James wrote:[
That logic is flawed. There have been an increasing number of mass shootings with assault weapons Since the assault ban was lifted. You would have to argue that the increase was not due to lifting the ban.

Can you name the assault weapons used...

All are or were semi automatic rifles
Should all semi automatic rifles be banned, or only the scary looking ones.

video to illustrate the differences.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C-CLsMRcA0

I got this from Tucker Carlson

DT is an amazing liar, Nixon, Clinton are dwarfed by the sheer quantity
347 days. 1,950 misleading or outright false claims. 1 Donald Trump ...
All False statements involving Donald Trump | PolitiFact
www.politifact.com/personalities/donald ... ing/false/
PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

But he's going to stand up to China....

Should all semi automatic rifles be banned, or only the scary looking ones.

Well, "semi-automatic" just means not "fully-automatic." You mentioned that the Army changed the M-16 from fully auto to semi-auto (i.e. set to burst mode of three shots). Since you brought it up, you can probably explain why. Was/is an M-16 an "assault rifle"? Sure it is? Assault defines the purpose of the weapon, and the Army thought it was good enough at it that it could perform successfully in combat in semi-automatic.

If by assault, you think I mean the style of the weapon, that's silly. I don't think that anything more than a single shot firearm is necessary for self defense, but if someone buys a .45 for the home instead of a revolver, I wouldn't complain.

Don't give me the people have to hunt. But, I would agree that the laws in a state with grizzlies should not automatically be the same for someone who lives in a state with no predators, or a state with large populations of livestock to protect, etc. I think that target shooters everywhere should be able to have their weapons. I also don't see the problem with registering weapons.

If the shooter was/is mentally ill, can they charge him with "premeditated" murder?
http://www.businessinsider.com/florida- ... ers-2018-2

Steve James wrote:

Should all semi automatic rifles be banned, or only the scary looking ones.

Well, "semi-automatic" just means not "fully-automatic." You mentioned that the Army changed the M-16 from fully auto to semi-auto (i.e. set to burst mode of three shots). Since you brought it up, you can probably explain why. Was/is an M-16 an "assault rifle"? Sure it is? Assault defines the purpose of the weapon, and the Army thought it was good enough at it that it could perform successfully in combat in semi-automatic.

The Army change to three round burst because full auto waste a lot of ammunition and it's not very accurate.

One of the main distinctions of assault rifles, they can be used fully automatic. Ie small machine guns. Semi automatic as far as I know only refers to one round chambered and fired at one time by trigger pull.

Steve James changing and shifting his meaning and redefining his argument each time his BS is exposed. Hard to have an honest 'debate' with anyone who does that.

BruceP wrote:Steve James changing and shifting his meaning and redefining his argument each time his BS is exposed. Hard to have an honest 'debate' with anyone who does that.

Yep, his style, very obvious.

Yep, I changed the meaning of assault. Ok, let's return to windy's question. I would ban weapons modifications that permit them to be fired at a rate similar to an automatic weapon. Forget the word assault.

Again, addressing windy, yep, the Army changed the M-16 to "semi-auto" because of too much "spray and pray" shooting. Early models also suffered from malfunctioning. Not to mention, fully-automatic firing --especially while under fire-- is inaccurate. That, you can check somewhere on Google --but it's common sense as well as being a function of the tendency for "rise."

No sense trying to argue with me if you think I'm against all guns or gun ownership. True. Now, which weapons would you ban or restrict, and why?

Steve James wrote: Now, which weapons would you ban or restrict, and why?

Memes

The reasons are pretty obvious, but just in case;

Posting memes to support an argument or to serve as a surrogate for commentary is low-level. It demonstrates a laziness and bias.

Yawn. I'm terrible.

Steve James wrote:Yawn. I'm terrible.

Nope, just biased beyond reasonibility