Why does the AW ban target "assault rifles" - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why does the AW ban target "assault rifles" (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 4/15/2006 5:36:50 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ANTI-GUNNERS and the AWB never actually did anything to regulate REAL Assault Rifles. Assault Rifles by defintion have the ability to fire full-auto. Assault Rifles are already regulated though NFA.

THE MAIN REASON the anti-gunners used the "Assault Weapon" lingo was to add the word semi-automatic to the front of it.

Semi-automatic Assault Rifle just sound evil. It is also a OXYMORON. An assault rifle is not a
asault rifle if it is a semi-ONLY rifle.

But the TRUTH DOES NOT MATTER. The ANTI-GUNNERS were sucessful with the attempts
to combine the two words.

Just think about how many times you have heard the term Semi-auto Assault Weapon or
actually called a AR-15 an Assault Rifle. They even convinced us...

LB

Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

I call it a lead hose with a 30 round bullet stick. What do you call your gun a Assault rifle ahahahhaa.

Each post from you just gets more stupid.

Posted: 4/15/2006 8:13:54 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

brilliant! a bunch of overweight internet commandouches with semi autos up against a trained army.

habla "slaughter"?

....not this Jarhead!

Not this Joe either.

Posted: 4/15/2006 8:22:34 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I have a felling they would miss. As we all know anything made in china is crap. Anything made in Russia is inaccurate. There tanks are a combo of Russia and China parts so.

Edit: 52 posts thats enough tommrow I will have something good worth while to talk about.

The likelihood of your posts becoming more worthwhile is virtually nil. Unless, of course, that addtional head trauma will offset your inability to spell and form cogent thoughts....

Posted: 4/15/2006 4:32:22 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

Trouble is, 15 mill of those gun owners would get in their Hummers, Expeditions, etc and flee to Canada or the 'safe' zone of the US.

Yeah, just like all those people on flight 93. buncha cowards.

Posted: 4/15/2006 4:35:58 PM EDT

[#5]

They are intimidating.

Posted: 4/15/2006 7:21:33 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I plan on using more then one and a AT4 is very powerful.

14inchs of armor. Plus the tanks are made in china. I would have no problem firing that thing at 250 meters. AT4 Enjoy

ever fire one before? I've shot a few of them, it is more difficult than it looks. I also wouldnt expect it to knock out a tank even if you live long enough after the tanks start hosing your launch site down with coax to get a second or third off. the launch signature of those things is pretty big.

Yeah I know people will be to much of a pussy to help out. So I will be the only one firing one. Also I plan on runing my ass off after firing. Plus they arn't the united states army they are some china army with made in china toys. Plus I plan on firing it from a roof top or some where like that maybe a window.

Then they will send a HE round at ya. Try and run away from that.

I have a felling they would miss. As we all know anything made in china is crap. Anything made in Russia is inaccurate. There tanks are a combo of Russia and China parts so.

Well with HE-Frag they have some room for error.

Posted: 4/15/2006 7:27:56 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

brilliant! a bunch of overweight internet commandouches with semi autos up against a trained army.

habla "slaughter"?

....not this Jarhead!

you're in the minority. as are combat arms veterans who might actually be worth a shit in that situation.

I am by no means in my top shape , but I'm still only 6'1" and 190#.....I don't smoke, and I kind of work out, so I think I'd do pretty well as an American Insurgent against an occupying force.....as long as I had a few thousand of you guys helping out!!

Posted: 4/16/2006 6:34:21 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

brilliant! a bunch of overweight internet commandouches with semi autos up against a trained army.

habla "slaughter"?

....not this Jarhead!

you're in the minority. as are combat arms veterans who might actually be worth a shit in that situation.

I am by no means in my top shape , but I'm still only 6'1" and 190#.....I don't smoke, and I kind of work out, so I think I'd do pretty well as an American Insurgent against an occupying force.....as long as I had a few thousand of you guys helping out!!

I think since most of us have fairly accurate weapons.
Sniper rifles, AR15s, ect
We all just need to wake up kill 1 a day and go on with our lives. For most of us that would be point a gun out the window and fire. Ods are they won't be every where. We have a lot cities spread out they have all there cities along the coast.

Posted: 4/16/2006 6:46:05 AM EDT

[#9]

Wake up guys, the invasion has already started - they were just marching down main streets recently.

Posted: 4/16/2006 6:50:33 AM EDT

[#10]

Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

You are correct.

The dumbass gun grabbers called them "Semiautomatic Machine Guns".

Posted: 4/16/2006 6:53:04 AM EDT

[#11]

So anyway, would we then be the "insurgents"?

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:01:26 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

Ahhh the ARFCOM commando scenario...

Problem is a lot of them will be too busy deciding which rifle they want to get dirty by pulling it out of the safe and actually firing it..Then they will have trouble deciding which tactical vest goes best with thier leg holster..Couple these factors with how many people will be posting here looking for advice on which tactical camo they should wear and what round is better against advancing armies...Then of course the ARFCOM army will have to post pictures of them in thier "bug out" gear to seek approval from the other overweight cubicle office warriors..

In other words,we would be fucked.

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:02:42 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
So anyway, would we then be the "insurgents"?

Yeah, Only we wouldn't be blowing up civilians. I do want IEDs though. Big ones. Really fucking big ones. Ones that put Iraqi IEDs to shame.

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:05:56 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

Ahhh the ARFCOM commando scenario...

Problem is a lot of them will be too busy deciding which rifle they want to get dirty by pulling it out of the safe and actually firing it..Then they will have trouble deciding which tactical vest goes best with thier leg holster..Couple these factors with how many people will be posting here looking for advice on which tactical camo they should wear and what round is better against advancing armies...Then of course the ARFCOM army will have to post pictures of them in thier "bug out" gear to seek approval from the other overweight cubicle office warriors..

In other words,we would be fucked.

I will answer all your questions
Vest Not needed just point your rifle out the window.
Guns needed AR15 and something powerful Such as .300 weatherby .50bmg maybe 25mm barret m109.

You get your one kill a day and thats it.

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:15:59 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

Ahhh the ARFCOM commando scenario...

Problem is a lot of them will be too busy deciding which rifle they want to get dirty by pulling it out of the safe and actually firing it..Then they will have trouble deciding which tactical vest goes best with thier leg holster..Couple these factors with how many people will be posting here looking for advice on which tactical camo they should wear and what round is better against advancing armies...Then of course the ARFCOM army will have to post pictures of them in thier "bug out" gear to seek approval from the other overweight cubicle office warriors..

In other words,we would be fucked.hr

I will answer all your questions
Vest Not needed just point your rifle out the window.
Guns needed AR15 and something powerful Such as .300 weatherby .50bmg maybe 25mm barret m109.

You get your one kill a day and thats it.

I think the assault weapon of choice would be something that I have already and goes bang everytime. There is always the option of scavageing the dead enemies for their guns and ammo. I bet they will have some of those banned steel core 7.62x39 ammunition that the liberals are so afraid of.

But then once we start winning we would have to deal with our own gov takeing control back. They would put a bag limit on kills a day. Require troops to work only 8 hours a day. And we would still loose jobs to mexicans because 4 of them would work for one MRE and we would want a whole one to ourselves. And they would still be shooting each other more than fighting the enemy.

They wouldn't get past the states lining commieforya even with the state reps surendering and saying we should give the rest of the counrty to them.

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:54:21 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

You are correct.

The dumbass gun grabbers called them "Semiautomatic Machine Guns".

Where did that happen? Show me.

Posted: 4/16/2006 7:59:26 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What we need is a invasion on American soil while all our troops are some where else. So the American people can show how important it is to have such weapons.

Ahhh the ARFCOM commando scenario...

Problem is a lot of them will be too busy deciding which rifle they want to get dirty by pulling it out of the safe and actually firing it..Then they will have trouble deciding which tactical vest goes best with thier leg holster..Couple these factors with how many people will be posting here looking for advice on which tactical camo they should wear and what round is better against advancing armies...Then of course the ARFCOM army will have to post pictures of them in thier "bug out" gear to seek approval from the other overweight cubicle office warriors..

In other words,we would be fucked.

I will answer all your questions
Vest Not needed just point your rifle out the window.
Guns needed AR15 and something powerful Such as .300 weatherby .50bmg maybe 25mm barret m109.

You get your one kill a day and thats it.

Dude, have you ever been next to large (say....90mm) guns goung off? Ever seen the impact area? Allow me to say that your stucco house (even with your care bears mattress against the wall) won't cut it. Not to mention that guns are loud. people tend to shoot back when you shoot at them.

Posted: 4/16/2006 8:01:01 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

You are correct.

The dumbass gun grabbers called them "Semiautomatic Machine Guns".

Where did that happen? Show me.

he's right, i have seen a few articles calling a tec-9 a "semiautomatic machine pistol". sorry, i don't have a link.

Posted: 4/16/2006 8:04:09 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

You are correct.

The dumbass gun grabbers called them "Semiautomatic Machine Guns".

Where did that happen? Show me.

he's right, i have seen a few articles calling a tec-9 a "semiautomatic machine pistol". sorry, i don't have a link.

That may or may not be true, but I was referring to the thread title. The AWB did not target assault rifles, it targeted our semiautos.

Posted: 4/16/2006 8:53:01 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Damn. Even the dumbass gun grabbers did not call it a Semi-automatic Assault Rifle!

You are correct.

The dumbass gun grabbers called them "Semiautomatic Machine Guns".

Where did that happen? Show me.

Sorry, Larry, I failed to save all those old newspapers and tape all those old "news" shows just in case you doubted my memory.

You'll just have to take my word for it.

Larry, you are correct, an "Assault Rifle" is a full auto... but the antis played on that term, modifying it to "Assault Weapon" so they could also cover pistols and shotguns.

Another term often used was "legal machineguns".

There was a huge organized campaign to confuse the average person, discussing "assault weapons" (semiautos) , mixing the terms, showing full autos being fired, but talking about semiautos. It was a deliberate tactic to make the average person think semiautomatic = machine gun.

With this, the media succeeded.

The fact remains, "Assault Weapon" is an artificial, made up name.

When someone says "now that assault weapons are legal again" correct them, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon".

Posted: 4/16/2006 9:59:54 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Trouble is, 15 mill of those gun owners would get in their Hummers, Expeditions, etc and flee to Canada or the 'safe' zone of the US.

that's why i don't have a "bugout vehicle/kit" like some of the chickenshits around here. my guns are part of the active defense of this nation during times of peace and war

It's chicken shit to have a plan of escape? I don't think so. If you're in the middle of a war, and you can bugout on foot (with your bugout bag of course), and lets say you only need to travel 25 miles to get you and your family to safety, you would stay and fight a losing battle? How foolish. Number one on my list of concerns is the safety of my family, and a bugout bag or vehicle if applicable, hopefully will improve the odds of my family being safe.

Of course my guns are also part of an active defense for this nation too. There is a time and a place for this type of engaugement, when my wife and children are with me is not the prefered time.

Posted: 4/16/2006 10:24:31 AM EDT

[#22]

how can you ban somthing that doesnt exsist?

assault weapon is a made up term to describe a semi automatic rifle with one or mor of the following

pistol grip or any grip that pertrudes underneath butstock or trigger

detachable magazine with a capacity of more than ten rounds

threaded muzzle to accept muzzle devices such as a sound suppressor, muzzle brake or flash hider

and so on

in short we can ban an assault weapon no more than we can ban trolls and goblins

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why does the AW ban target "assault rifles" (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us