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.
I wouldn't call NATO 7.62x51 an "intermediate cartridge". I would call H&K G3 an assault rifle.
Anyway, I'll happily agree that the assault weapons ban is a terrible piece of legislation, for two reasons:
1. It's vague and convoluted. People aren't sure if they're breaking the law or not, and that's a terrible thing in lawmaking.
2. People kill each other with handguns, anyway.
1. I don't know anyone who considers the 7.62 x 51 an intermediate cartridge.
2. The term was coined and later used to distinguish between traditional handgun/submachine gun rounds like .45 ACP and high muzzle energy, high recoil and heavy per round weight rounds like the .30-06 and .303 British and yes 7.62 x 51 and 7.62 x 54 NATO etc. I'll leave out the NATO vs. "US" overlaps for another time.
I just wish people would just come out and say it. All the bickering back and forth with people that know what they are talking about and those that don't just gets old.
So the difference of a few seconds to fire off 20 rounds in semi-auto vs full auto doesn't make the AR-15 a weapon of war?
Assault Weapons Ban.
The purpose of calling out the AR15, is because a propaganda effort based on this gun would be more effective than trying to scare people over a Ruger ranch rile or a Henry lever action.
AR type guns are very popular so they are owned by many law abiding citizens in the USA. When the ban on these guns goes into effect, many honest people lose their freedoms due to popularity. Property Rights have little value to the extreme Left, (extreme, key word) when they stand in the way of the Left's’ agenda. Many honest citizens have ARs. An all out ban will result in the loss of personal property (of which the Left disapproves), so this would be a great victory for the Leftists. However, the main reason is that the Left is able to scare more people by demonizing the AR type guns. The purpose of these bans,,,,,is the BAN itself. NO greater safety or security is gained from taking freedoms away from citizens who are doing nothing wrong. We could discuss how silly it is to ban a gun based on the shape of the handle,or the name, but if someone is part of the freedom hating Left gun control effort, it would do little good.
So the difference of a few seconds to fire off 20 rounds in semi-auto vs full auto doesn't make the AR-15 a weapon of war?
.
It’s a step by step process, the idea being find the easiest target, like an AR-15 which due to it’s visual similarity with a M-16 and M-4 make it seem meaner, then when you finally get it banned switch the narrative and suddenly start believing statistics and it’ll seem that over night “vicious crime rates” linked to said weapon disappear, now it isn’t that farfetched to go for the next gun and the next followed by weapon types and finally leading to a complete weapons ban.
At least that’s the general idea, “look we banned this one so how about we also do the same to this other scary looking thing?”
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.
