Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You seem to forget, the ignorance is willful. You cant fix that. He stated he wants a complete ban. And he doesnt want to learn about what he is talking about. Derp. A complete ban is something that would be unwinnable, and would cause a big surge in violence.
Im not sure about that, so many people today are SO obedient and compliant...I just cannot see large groups of people standing up to fight, they would be more concerned over missing work, possibly getting arrested, loosing their house, cars, family, etc.
Local and state police would be the first line of defense any groups of citizens would clash with first, again, I just cannot see groups of citizens engaging in gun battles with police over an issue like this, majority of people would just whine and cry a little, probably talk tough, but ultimately they are not going to do anything where they could possibly be arrested.
No it is not misleading. I specifically used the word 'restrict' rather than ban, because this is what the initiative will do. I only wish that it were a ban on assault style weapons, but it's not.
Assault style weapons are primarily designed for the mass slaughter of innocents. It has always seemed to me that they should be illegal for anyone but police and military, under the due process clauses (5th & 14th Amendments) of the Constitution.
"Assault style weapons are primarily designed for the mass slaughter of innocents.'
You don't know what you aer talking about.
Being you like to cite the Constitution, what part of" The RIGHT of the people to KEEP and BEAR arms shall NOT be INFRINGED"
They don't use clips, they use magazines. Clips are for revolvers. If you want to talk guns, learn something. And I can't see anyone using a 22 cal for shooting a lot of people. They are underpowered and not very deadly.
"Clips are for revolvers", "If you want to talk guns, learn something."
Please DON'T fall into the anti gunners trap by making FALSE claims yourself.
I have a. 22 rifle WITH A CLIP. It holds 6 rounds.
Just because a poorly thought out bill injects some ignorant nomenclature does not make it so.
The term "assault rifle" was created by the U.S. Army in the very early 50's to define a rifle with a very specific purpose.
"The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[16] In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]
It must be capable of selective fire. <-(This means safe/single shot/full auto)
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, such as the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62x39mm and the 5.56x45mm NATO.
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards). Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles, despite frequently being called such."
Good Lord, please explain what a "high caliper clip of 30 bullets" is exactly, in detail
Does the true definition of assault rifle above mention magazine capacity at all? Nope. Is the feeble .22 LR an intermediate power cartridge? Nope. Does it have the effective range of 330 yards? Nope. Does the simple .22 rifles mentioned earlier in the thread have selective fire? Nope.
Just because some ignorant progressive dopes in Washington decide to call these other firearms "assault weapons" do not make them so, no matter how happy it makes you. Again, a case of stupid legislators over reaching.
More:
"Distinction from assault weapons
The term "assault rifle" is sometimes conflated with the term "assault weapon". According to the Associated Press Stylebook, the media should differentiate between "assault rifles", which are capable of fully automatic firing, and "assault weapons", which are semiautomatic and "not synonymous with assault rifle".[94] In the U.S., civilian ownership of machine guns (and assault rifles) has been tightly regulated since 1934 under the National Firearms Act and since 1986 under the Firearm Owners Protection Act.[95]"
The above link is a good history lesson on progressives disingenuous attempts confuse the public and use fear tactics over technical terms. You should read it.
Pistols are never defined as "assault " weapons. Ever. Even though this bill you are so keen on includes them.
You should truly educate yourself before voicing an opinion on such things. You are making a fool of yourself.
The OFFICIAL Dept of Defense publication DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THE TERM "assault rifle" nor "assault weapon"!
Joint Publication 1-02
Department of Defense
Dictionary of
Military and Associated Terms"
http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/jitc_dri/pdfs/jp1_02.pdf
Just because wiki says it, does NOT make it so!
Last edited by Quick Enough; 10-03-2018 at 05:44 AM..
A few years ago I heard it said that Washington had the highest per-capita NRA membership of any state. Undeniably, the state has traditionally opposed common-sense gun safety. A democratic governor even signed into law legalization of silencers in 2011. I don't know who needs a silencer other than an assassin or a gangster. I know that silencers were very popular among NY mafia back in the heyday of the Gambinos etc.
But the climate here has improved. I credit an influx of well-educated Californians, and well-informed millennial tech workers. Initiative 594, to mandate universal background checks, passed 59-40% in 2014. A coalition of concerned citizens, including Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Steve Ballmer, and Nick Hanauer (Amazon investor) generously donated to get it passed.
Now we have Initiative 1639, to restrict assault-style weapons. It's a good first step. There has always been confusion about the definition of 'assault style weapon.' I-1639 defines all semi-automatic style weapons as assault weapons. From the initiative: https://ballotpedia.org/Washington_I..._Measure_(2018)
I'm not a gun expert, so this is all Greek to me, but I'm told that this definition encompasses all semi-automatic-style weapons. This greatly simplifies things. No longer to police have to wonder whether the gun with the 'barrel shroud' is legal or not. The one thing I wish they had included is regulation of the high magazine clips. I think that is key, but they left it off.
Based on recent voting trends in the state, I think this will easily pass. Finally we will be on the road to common sense gun safety, as other advanced states such as California and New York.
SMH.... I won't even comment...
With some luck this will be shot down in court as unconstitutional. I feel for the people with common sense that live in WA.
Basically imposes the hand gun purchase and waiting period restrictions onto semi automatic rifles and introduces a duty to secure your weapon in the home if anyone who is not eligible to own has access.
They’re not coming to get grandfather’s M1 Carbine or outright banning ownership/purchase of a semi automatic rifle.
Yet. Only the ignorant can't see the tactic they are doing. Little here, little there... all for the end game of an all out ban.
"Clips are for revolvers", "If you want to talk guns, learn something."
Please DON'T fall into the anti gunners trap by making FALSE claims yourself.
I have a. 22 rifle WITH A CLIP. It holds 6 rounds.
Clips can be also used in rifles like the M1 Garand's en bloc 8 round clip, and stripper clips in other rifles. But, yes most modern semi auto rifles, and pistols use a magazine. The Left now wants to ban all semi auto rifles which are very rarely used in crime.
"Clips are for revolvers", "If you want to talk guns, learn something."
Please DON'T fall into the anti gunners trap by making FALSE claims yourself.
I have a. 22 rifle WITH A CLIP. It holds 6 rounds.
A 10-.22 has a removable box MAGAZINE. I have a 8 mm Steyr loaded by stripper clips into a removable magazine. A clip holds ammo together while being loaded into a magazine which holds rounds going into battery.
Why not let this dumb bill go forward then, if the guns they are targeting, are not really 'applicable', it wont even matter legally.
We have to pass it to see what's in it. Where have we heard that before.
No, we fight the *******s tooth and nail. Not an inch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
