While y'all are bickering about guns...

[Mad American]

Well are they military weapons are not? They can not be "military" and "pretend military" at the same time.

The AR-15 was first built by ArmaLite as a selective fire rifle for the United States armed forces. Because of financial problems, ArmaLite sold the AR-15 design to Colt. The select-fire AR-15 entered the US military system as the M16 rifle.

So yes, it's a military weapon. Dropping the automatic capability does not change this. Limiting the magazine to 10 rounds does not change this. But both are steps in that direction.

Attributes defined in Federal assault weapon legislation:
- Detachable magazines for fast reloading
- Collapsible stocks
- Folding stocks
- Pistol grips (on rifles)
- Bayonet mounts
- Flash suppressors
- Threaded barrels
- Barrel mounted grenade launcher mounts
- A barrel shroud
- Magazines greater than 10 rounds
- Semi-automatic functionality

The Winchester lever action, or as they were called then Winchester Repeating Arms, were originally manufactured for the US Cavalry. Is that a military weapon? What about the M1 Garande, the German Mauser, British 303. All of those were manufactured specifically for military use and only ONE meets a single requirement from your list....the M1 Garande is a semi auto. Are those "military weapons". Carlos Hathcock used a Winchester Model 70 during several of his missions in Vietnam...is that a military weapon. Today's military snipers use the Remington 700...military weapon?? There are hundreds of weapons on the market that meet one or two of the parameters in the list. Most are used in competition and several are sporting use. The Browning BOSS system can be considered a "flash suppressor". Hundreds use "detachable magazines" and are semi-auto. Many trap guns use stocks that can be considered "collapsible". There are single shot MUZZLELOADERS on the market that can be considered as having a "pistol grip". Like I said, until you people start focusing on the PERSON that carries out these types of acts they will continue, because no amount of gun control will stop them.

[billy.pilgrim]

Well are they military weapons are not? They can not be "military" and "pretend military" at the same time.

The AR-15 was first built by ArmaLite as a selective fire rifle for the United States armed forces. Because of financial problems, ArmaLite sold the AR-15 design to Colt. The select-fire AR-15 entered the US military system as the M16 rifle.

So yes, it's a military weapon. Dropping the automatic capability does not change this. Limiting the magazine to 10 rounds does not change this. But both are steps in that direction.

Attributes defined in Federal assault weapon legislation:
- Detachable magazines for fast reloading
- Collapsible stocks
- Folding stocks
- Pistol grips (on rifles)
- Bayonet mounts
- Flash suppressors
- Threaded barrels
- Barrel mounted grenade launcher mounts
- A barrel shroud
- Magazines greater than 10 rounds
- Semi-automatic functionality

The Winchester lever action, or as they were called then Winchester Repeating Arms, were originally manufactured for the US Cavalry. Is that a military weapon? What about the M1 Garande, the German Mauser, British 303. All of those were manufactured specifically for military use and only ONE meets a single requirement from your list....the M1 Garande is a semi auto. Are those "military weapons". Carlos Hathcock used a Winchester Model 70 during several of his missions in Vietnam...is that a military weapon. Today's military snipers use the Remington 700...military weapon?? There are hundreds of weapons on the market that meet one or two of the parameters in the list. Most are used in competition and several are sporting use. The Browning BOSS system can be considered a "flash suppressor". Hundreds use "detachable magazines" and are semi-auto. Many trap guns use stocks that can be considered "collapsible". There are single shot MUZZLELOADERS on the market that can be considered as having a "pistol grip". Like I said, until you people start focusing on the PERSON that carries out these types of acts they will continue, because no amount of gun control will stop them.

too bad 'we" people aren't allowed to focus on "the PERSON that" (who) carries out these acts because you people have fought and fought to keep the gun show loophole open so anybody and everybody can buy any gun they want without having to show any sort of ability or competence - mental or otherwise

it all goes back to the nra - they own the current gun laws and everything associated

time to have a reasonable discussion - everyone one but the nra is ready and willing

[Mad American]

too bad 'we" people aren't allowed to focus on "the PERSON that" (who) carries out these acts because you people have fought and fought to keep the gun show loophole open so anybody and everybody can buy any gun they want without having to show any sort of ability or competence - mental or otherwise

it all goes back to the nra - they own the current gun laws and everything associated

time to have a reasonable discussion - everyone one but the nra is ready and willing

Nice deflection! However, since you are willing to discuss...lets discuss. Why don't you tell me how a man, that beat his 92 year old grandmother to death with a hammer, was on the street after serving only 17 years?? Once you people decide to drop the NRA bull crap and focus on THAT ISSUE then we might make some progress but I'm not holding my breath.

[O Really]

Once you people decide to drop the NRA bull crap and focus on THAT ISSUE then we might make some progress but I'm not holding my breath.

To the fundamentals: (1) the NRA is a well-funded, well-organized group with a strong lobbying arm. Right? (2) The NRA has had much success in its political efforts, both nationally and in essentially all states. Right? (3) The NRA's goals include avoiding any law or regulation that limits what it sees as Second Amendment Rights. Right? (yes, I know there are Second Amendment rights, but not everyone - even Supreme Court Justices - sees them exactly the same.) (4) The NRA resists all efforts at limiting use of firearms, registration of firearms, or any regulation of firearms and related activities. Right?

They are the 800 pound gorilla, and own way more members of Congress than the rest of us. They have drafted most of the current gun legislation (like take your guns to work), and are given "approval" privileges on most legislation proposed. They can't be dropped from any discussion of firearms - and would refuse to be dropped even if we tried.

[billy.pilgrim]

too bad 'we" people aren't allowed to focus on "the PERSON that" (who) carries out these acts because you people have fought and fought to keep the gun show loophole open so anybody and everybody can buy any gun they want without having to show any sort of ability or competence - mental or otherwise

it all goes back to the nra - they own the current gun laws and everything associated

time to have a reasonable discussion - everyone one but the nra is ready and willing

Nice deflection! However, since you are willing to discuss...lets discuss. Why don't you tell me how a man, that beat his 92 year old grandmother to death with a hammer, was on the street after serving only 17 years?? Once you people decide to drop the NRA bull crap and focus on THAT ISSUE then we might make some progress but I'm not holding my breath.

as I said you are unwilling to talk about gun laws

take away the ability for the felons and mentally ill to legally guns guns at gun shows and we make a step toward preventing gun violence by criminals and crazies

and me deflecting?

we were discussing gun law and you spun around and accused the justice system - btw that would be a different topic, say - deflecting

[Mad American]

as I said you are unwilling to talk about gun laws

take away the ability for the felons and mentally ill to legally guns guns at gun shows and we make a step toward preventing gun violence by criminals and crazies

and me deflecting?

we were discussing gun law and you spun around and accused the justice system - btw that would be a different topic, say - deflecting

I've already said that I support implementing full NICS checks at gun shows AND adding mental health records to the NICS system. However, until we deal with the PEOPLE that are using an inanimate object in crime then no manner of bans or restrictions will stop them. Now do you care to actually address how a man served only 17 years for killing another human being, and was on the street an able to kill again??

[Mad American]

To the fundamentals: (1) the NRA is a well-funded, well-organized group with a strong lobbying arm. Right? (2) The NRA has had much success in its political efforts, both nationally and in essentially all states. Right? (3) The NRA's goals include avoiding any law or regulation that limits what it sees as Second Amendment Rights. Right? (yes, I know there are Second Amendment rights, but not everyone - even Supreme Court Justices - sees them exactly the same.) (4) The NRA resists all efforts at limiting use of firearms, registration of firearms, or any regulation of firearms and related activities. Right?

They are the 800 pound gorilla, and own way more members of Congress than the rest of us. They have drafted most of the current gun legislation (like take your guns to work), and are given "approval" privileges on most legislation proposed. They can't be dropped from any discussion of firearms - and would refuse to be dropped even if we tried.

Fair enough. However, why do you not also give the NRA credit for supporting stiffer penalties for gun crimes and lobbying to reform our justice system so that violent and gun offenders are not released in order to commit crime again??

[billy.pilgrim]

as I said you are unwilling to talk about gun laws

take away the ability for the felons and mentally ill to legally guns guns at gun shows and we make a step toward preventing gun violence by criminals and crazies

and me deflecting?

we were discussing gun law and you spun around and accused the justice system - btw that would be a different topic, say - deflecting

I've already said that I support implementing full NICS checks at gun shows AND adding mental health records to the NICS system. However, until we deal with the PEOPLE that are using an inanimate object in crime then no manner of bans or restrictions will stop them. Now do you care to actually address how a man served only 17 years for killing another human being, and was on the street an able to kill again??

start a thread - I will agree that he shouldn't be on the

but saying that you refuse to close the gun show loophole until all of your other issues are settled first is nothing but another rightwing strawman defense and a free pass for a man who served only 17 years for killing another human being being on the street and able to kill again

[Mad American]

as I said you are unwilling to talk about gun laws

take away the ability for the felons and mentally ill to legally guns guns at gun shows and we make a step toward preventing gun violence by criminals and crazies

and me deflecting?

we were discussing gun law and you spun around and accused the justice system - btw that would be a different topic, say - deflecting

I've already said that I support implementing full NICS checks at gun shows AND adding mental health records to the NICS system. However, until we deal with the PEOPLE that are using an inanimate object in crime then no manner of bans or restrictions will stop them. Now do you care to actually address how a man served only 17 years for killing another human being, and was on the street an able to kill again??

start a thread - I will agree that he shouldn't be on the

but saying that you refuse to close the gun show loophole until all of your other issues are settled first is nothing but another rightwing strawman defense and a free pass for a man who served only 17 years for killing another human being being on the street and able to kill again

I didn't say that. Add NICS to the show sales and mental health to NICS NOW!!!! However, we still need to deal with the PEOPLE using these weapons as well. Do you not agree?

[billy.pilgrim]

absolutely


but mistakes will always be made in any good justice system and finding anecdotal examples of problems can't begin to stand up against the barn door holes the nra has pushed into gun laws

[O Really]

...Why don't you tell me how a man, that beat his 92 year old grandmother to death with a hammer, was on the street after serving only 17 years?? Once you people decide to drop the NRA bull crap and focus on THAT ISSUE then we might make some progress but I'm not holding my breath.

We didn't let him out. The charge and sentence were a plea bargain, likely influenced by con budget cutting and con insistence on locking up millions of nonviolent drug offenders.

Then, he did live a quiet life for 14 years after being released. If he'd gotten hit by a bus before then we wouldn't be discussing him and it would have been cost-effective to let him out.

Go ahead and blame liberals (without any evidence) for loving granny killers if you want, we'll laugh at you for not discussing the real factors that lead to such short-ish sentences. We won't hold our breaths waiting for you to focus.

Yeah, assuming Mad is talking about Spengler - he never has said who he's talking about - he pled guilty to manslaughter. If Mad actually wanted the answer to his question, he'd have to look at the case files, the actual sentence, and the conditions under which Spengler was released. Each case has its own set of facts and circumstances, including a Republican Mississippi governor pardoning a handful of convicted murderers ostensibly for servicing his car or his wife or whatever. But in general, I don't have a problem with harsh sentences for violent crimes.

[Mad American]

There are some examples of people successfully (as well as unsuccessfully) defending themselves or their homes/business because they had quick access to a firearm. There are some examples of an armed person staving off a robbery in a public place. But the story I'd like to hear, if a true one exists, is an incident where a person used an AR-15 type weapon to successfully defend himself or his home/business and it could be shown that some lesser weapon would not have been successful. We're talking regular "law abiding" people here...not drug dealers, gang members or cartel people.

Here you go. Granted a "lesser weapon" might have been more effective but this was a FIFTEEN year old defending himself and his sister. All things considered I'd say it was the best tool for the job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMg0FQS6 ... e=youtu.be

[O Really]

There are some examples of people successfully (as well as unsuccessfully) defending themselves or their homes/business because they had quick access to a firearm. There are some examples of an armed person staving off a robbery in a public place. But the story I'd like to hear, if a true one exists, is an incident where a person used an AR-15 type weapon to successfully defend himself or his home/business and it could be shown that some lesser weapon would not have been successful. We're talking regular "law abiding" people here...not drug dealers, gang members or cartel people.

Here you go. Granted a "lesser weapon" might have been more effective but this was a FIFTEEN year old defending himself and his sister. All things considered I'd say it was the best tool for the job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMg0FQS6 ... e=youtu.be

Well good for him. Courageous kid. But I'll bet if there had been no AR-15 around but a 12-gauge, he'd still have done the job.

[O Really]

Ya' know, the H&K MP-5 is a really badass gun. Very efficient killer, very macho. I wonder why none of the mass killers ever use one? Oh yeah, it's also very expensive and very difficult to get.

[Mad American]

Ya' know, the H&K MP-5 is a really badass gun. Very efficient killer, very macho. I wonder why none of the mass killers ever use one? Oh yeah, it's also very expensive and very difficult to get.

The MP-5 is normally chambered in 9mm, a handgun round. The MP-5/10 is chambered in the larger 10mm and the MP-5/40 is chambered in 40 S&W both are also HANDGUN rounds. In addition the MP-5 is not known for accuracy or durability. The MP-5 has no use in any sporting field which is why it is difficult to get and when you can get one, expensive. Also, the terminal ballistics of the handgun chamberings are nowhere those of any centerfire rifle cartridge. Your "really badass gun" is actually a mean looking wimp and not one that I would reach for in ANY situation.

[O Really]

... Your "really badass gun" is actually a mean looking wimp and not one that I would reach for in ANY situation.

Could be, but there are many who actually use the MP5 who would disagree with you, including Navy SEALs and many other elite counter-terrorist units around the world – such as the British SAS, Germany’s GSG 9, and Spain’s GEO. Not that I know anything about it, but I think your opinion is in the minority. In any case, since the average mass killer wannabe is likely way less knowledgeable than you, I'd guess if he could get his hands on an MP5, he'd use it. It would appear that restrictions on civilian ownership/use of specified firearm types can work.

[homerfobe]

Not taking sides here, but it appears that Mad American has all of you 'out-gunned' (no pun intended)
in the knowledge of guns department. Carry on.

[homerfobe]

Here you go. Granted a "lesser weapon" might have been more effective but this was a FIFTEEN year old defending himself and his sister. All things considered I'd say it was the best tool for the job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMg0FQS6 ... e=youtu.be

I love a happy ending! Thanks for the video.

[rstrong]

Video game companies are marketing real weapons.

As Electronic Arts prepared to market Medal of Honor Warfighter, the latest version of its top-selling video game released in October, it created a Web site that promoted the manufacturers of the guns, knives and combat-style gear depicted in the game.

Among the video game giant’s marketing partners on the Web site were the McMillan Group, the maker of a high-powered sniper’s rifle, and Magpul, which sells high-capacity magazines and other accessories for assault-style weapons.

Links on the Medal of Honor site allowed visitors to click through on the Web sites of the game’s partners and peruse their catalogs.

[...]

Assault-style rifles made by Bushmaster Firearms have a roster of credits that any actor would envy, including appearances in Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, a part of the popular Activision series.

[Mad American]

... Your "really badass gun" is actually a mean looking wimp and not one that I would reach for in ANY situation.

Could be, but there are many who actually use the MP5 who would disagree with you, including Navy SEALs and many other elite counter-terrorist units around the world – such as the British SAS, Germany’s GSG 9, and Spain’s GEO. Not that I know anything about it, but I think your opinion is in the minority. In any case, since the average mass killer wannabe is likely way less knowledgeable than you, I'd guess if he could get his hands on an MP5, he'd use it. It would appear that restrictions on civilian ownership/use of specified firearm types can work.

The MP-5 is well suited for the purpose that those units use it for. It is a close quarters combat weapon, that is designed to put A LOT of smaller, short range, low energy bullets in the air fast. The calibers used are not known for traveling on once striking objects, or if they do they are greatly reduced, thus reducing "friendly fire" incidents. Simply put the MP-5 is a specific purpose weapon, that serves that purpose well, but in the grand scheme it is far from the category of "badass".