General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
multigraincracker
(37,619 posts)Only arms.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)Like swords, spears, machine guns, etc.
multigraincracker
(37,619 posts)black jacks are regulated. Yet only guns, seem to fall under the 2nd.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)I don't understand the point you're making.
multigraincracker
(37,619 posts)to carry brass knuckles concealed.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)NullTuples
(6,017 posts)States such as Alaska & Arizona do not require a permit, purchase permit, or registration. There are no background checks on private gun sales, and open carry is allowed without a permit.
There are at least ten similar states:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/best-states-for-gun-owners
https://141shootingrange.com/the-easiest-place-to-buy-gun/
ShazzieB
(22,568 posts)"Guns are regulated" is a meaningless statement in a country where laws concerning the ownership and use of firearms vary so widely and wildly from one state to another.
Guns are regulated in some states. In some others, they are barely regulated at all.
Aussie105
(7,905 posts)at the time the 2nd amendment was written.
I'm sure advances in killing power like that represented by an AR-15 wasn't on their mind at the time.
ShazzieB
(22,568 posts)Seriously, I don't understand why this comment was directed at me. 
Aussie105
(7,905 posts)And not directed to you personally.
It's a message I repeat often, ie the current interpretation of the second amendment is just not sane.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)Even ignoring all the arguments regarding the meaning of the term, the end result of what they've built so far is a gun-wielding mob.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)and paperwork is required. Buying a firearm from a dealer, requires paperwork. Some states require paperwork when selling individual to individual. This is one type of "regulation". In colonial times, regulation could also mean adjusting a thing to work better, as regulating a clock to keep better time, or drill a company of persons to perform military tasks more precisely.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)21 states no longer require concealed carry permits,
Only 10 states still require all firearm transfers to be conducted by or processed through licensed dealers, who conduct background checks.
25 states now require neither a waiting period or background checks.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)I must have missed the news feed of all those increased deaths in those states. After all, increased availability means more deaths.
Kaleva
(40,352 posts)Here's a link to a AR-15 shotgun:
https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/shotguns/jts-shotguns/jts-ar-style-shotgun-12ga-2-5rd-black.cfm?gun_id=102262599
yagotme
(4,135 posts)Kaleva
(40,352 posts)
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
DenaliDemocrat
(1,777 posts)Neither of which are legal for big game in most state’s out west- they are too small.
It’s the high capacity magazines that make them so lethal
Kaleva
(40,352 posts)The semiauto action coupled with high capacity magazines makes them and other similar guns deadly
Timewas
(2,738 posts)Major difference being AR and This one only fire one round per trigger pull
newdayneeded
(2,493 posts)and a $25 bump stock, but you know, that's just stuff for the shooting range, and practice, and stuff.
I'd really like to know one legit reason for needing anything over a 10 round clip!
we were not discussing size of magazines, we were talking about actual ammo used... Both use .223/5.56.
https://www.basspro.com/shop/en/promag-magazines-for-ruger-mini-14-rifles
gay texan
(3,211 posts)Naturally...
newdayneeded
(2,493 posts)you sink 10 rounds into it. more chances to explode the liver too.
William Seger
(12,441 posts)... and as I read somewhere, "If you need 10 rounds to bring down a deer, you should probably take up fishing."
newdayneeded
(2,493 posts)
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)... that you can fire an AR-15 -- and any semi-auto rifle -- one shot at a time if you want, right?
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)yagotme
(4,135 posts)A .30-06 out of a bolt gun can be very devastating on something small.
madville
(7,847 posts)High capacity magazines, bump stocks, and firearms themselves are easily 3D printable with a $300-400 printer. There’s not any realistic way to ban them since polymer manufacturing is so easy now.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)Or did you mean M-16? Some here get confused between the two, occasionally.
If you fail to see the difference I don't know how to help you...
yagotme
(4,135 posts)
Ligyron
(8,006 posts)However, the main difference, and in fact the only real difference between those as replicas and semi auto rifles who's ammo they copied, are they are scary looking.
That's what I don't get about this demand that "assault" rifles be banned. Ok, if it makes you feel good but semi auto rifles firing .223 rounds are every bit as deadly as far as I can see.
Plus, I've seen some guys work a bolt action almost as fast as a semi auto too so there's that...which would include most hunting rifles.
That's as long as high capacity mags can be used in them which may not always be the case, idk.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)The Mini-14 fires .223 or 5.56. The Mini-30 fires 7.62.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)The Mini-14 in .223 Rem/5.56 NATO. The 3rd rifle is an AR-15, same caliber. One of the top 2 has been classified previously as an "assault rifle", while the 2nd was not. Scary-looking attachments, that have NO impact on the actual performance of the rifle itself, has transformed an "acceptable" (at the time) rifle, into an evil, black, "assault weapon". The operating system/magazine capacity was not changed. THAT'S why I ask for specifics for when a gun-grabber wants to start banning things on looks alone. Can't judge a book by it's cover.
BTW, the M-14/M1A in .308/7.62 NATO is the daddy of the Mini-14. Same general looks, different size and gas system.
Ligyron
(8,006 posts)Gonna have to do a complicated formula for simple addition, now.
Bucky
(55,334 posts)They never seem able to explain why so many mass shootings occur by people using this weapon, which they say "aren't real assault weapons"
If it's a weapon that can rip a first grader in half or mow down a dozen shoppers at department store, it shouldn't be available. Until we fix human nature we won't be able to stop the shooting of innocent civilians. All all the gun control ads against her saying is there's no reason to allow rage incidents that could have 2-4 victims to turn into it an incident with 20-40 victims. Human tragedies will occur, there's no reason to give license for those tragedies to turn into catastrophes.
ShazzieB
(22,568 posts)And there are a bunch of people posting in this thread right now who are creeping me out bigly and need to take their gun humping asses someplace else where defending guns that turn little children into hamburger is welcome. This is NOT that place! 
Anyone who doesn't like what I just said can go straight to hell. I come to DU to try and get some freaking relief from all the shit that is going on in this country, not to read a steaming pile of gun worshipping bull shit!
Aussie105
(7,905 posts)Seems like some are saying weapons of war are quite harmless.
I guess, by themselves they are.
Just as people are quite harmless. In isolation.
But take a 'harmless' person and give him a 'harmless' gun, and . . . well, just watch the news.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)then watching the news will get you tomorrow's weather forecast. You realize that there are thousands of ranges across the US that host shoots quite often, and nobody goes nuts and starts shooting the participants? If you live in northern Ohio, of west central Indiana, there is a once a year gathering of people from all across the US to shoot the very weapons that some here think that they get up and commit mass shooting all on their own. It's the PERSON that's the criminal, not the inanimate object.
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)don't read it, just use the trash thread function.
See how easy that is.
ShazzieB
(22,568 posts)I'm aware ot that option, but to me it's not an effective solution. I have no way of knowing what I'm going to think of something until I've read it, and once I've read it it's too late.
Besides, if I trash a whole thread, I miss ALL of it. There are some excellent comments in this thread, and I'm glad I got to read those.
Putting people on ignore is another possible tactic, but I don't like to use that unless and until I see a pretty strong, problematic pattern in someone's posts. That takes time, and it rarely happens. The few times I've done it are mostly cases where someone is making obnoxiously repetitious argumentative posts in a particular thread.
The bottom line, to me, is that hiding threads or hiding certain people's posts, feels like hiding from them. I'm glad those options exist, but they are only appealing to me in certain specific circumstances.
In this case, I said my piece laet night and then got out of the thread. I've returned only to respond to replies to my own comments that show up in My Posts (like this one).
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)but you did diss some DU members here who have a difference of opinion, which in of itself isn't a bad thing to have different opinions on subject matters.,
I'm at the age where I don't let the little things bother me anymore, especially on a discussion board.
Anyways, I said my piece.
Have a great Sunday, what's left of it.
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)I also never had any of the Soldiers in my platoon fire in any mode other than semi-automatic - and I wasn’t some sort of REMF. I was an Infantry Platoon Leader in Iraq between Feb 2004 and March 2005 and I saw plenty of combat.
The burst and semi-automatic modes are just about never used by anyone with any sort of actual training or combat experience.
whopis01
(3,919 posts)You said:
The burst and semi-automatic modes are just about never used by anyone with any sort of actual training or combat experience.
I think you meant “The burst and automatic modes…”
We never used the three round burst on our M16s/M4s, never trained to do it and it wasn’t part of the qualification courses. The only time we ever used it was at the range if we needed to use up the leftover ammo so it didn’t have to be counted and turned back into the armory.
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)we used the 3 round burst as much as we used the single round selection, rarely did we use the, as we liked to call it, the rock n roll function, that was only used for suppressing fire.
Amishman
(5,928 posts)Most hunting rifle bullets are significantly more powerful.
The problem is semi automatic and high capacity, combined with very low cost.
AverageOldGuy
(3,802 posts). . . and most serious hunting rifles are bolt-action with 4-5 round magazines.
"Bolt-action" means you must work the bolt to load a round, fire it, work the bolt to re-load, fire again -- and after 4 or 5 rounds, you are out of ammo.
The AR-15 is semi-auto -- pull the trigger and it fires as fast as you can pull the trigger. With a 20-round magazine, you can get 20 rounds in the air in around 15-20 seconds, reloading takes 2-3 seconds. 30-round magazines are readily available.
Amishman
(5,928 posts)The thing that makes AR-15s so dangerous is semi automatic and big magazines - not the type of bullet.
madville
(7,847 posts)Firearms and high capacity magazines are easily made at home now, really no way to put that toothpaste back in the tube
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)
flying_wahini
(8,274 posts)Sarcasm here.
AverageOldGuy
(3,802 posts)I carried an M-16 and a Ka-Bar for 12 long months in Vietnam. Both do what they are designed to do and they do it well.
The Ka-Bar is the standard issue US military fighting knife. It opens C-rations cans, cuts vines and ropes, cleans your fingernails, and kills people.
The M-16 kills people. It has no non-lethal uses.
No one needs a M-16/AR-15 except the cops and the military and if everyone and his redneck brother did not have an AR-15, the cops would not need them.
yagotme
(4,135 posts)6 1/2 yr Former Marine here. It was in a "quiet" period when I served. I shot an M16-A2 in competition while overseas. No one was killed.
"The M-16 kills people. It has no non-lethal uses."
This is incorrect.
madville
(7,847 posts)Don’t need them either, lots have innocent people have been killed by assault weapons in the hands of the police.
LymphocyteLover
(9,830 posts)
Old Crank
(7,039 posts)Since people pointed out the rules and regulations involved with the storage of the weapons in a Swiss household.
The Wizard
(13,724 posts)demands the right to gun violence like the USA.
calimary
(89,967 posts)Besides, the average schmuck who buys an AR-15 probably never gets the intensive training a Marine or other soldier from any branch of the service would get.
Pacifist Patriot
(25,212 posts)No, the US military does not use AR-15s. But my family is riddled with military and ex-military who consider it an assault weapon that can and does harm and kill human beings. So yes, they personally classify it as "military-grade" arms.
Shams is absolutely correct.
SouthernDem4ever
(6,619 posts)but I have little hope.
C Moon
(13,630 posts)are being slaughtered by them.
It takes a special kind of cold-hearted jackass to defend AR15 rights.
Evolve Dammit
(21,766 posts)militia. Constitutional amendment warranted and needed asap. Enough of this shit. You want to hunt, buy a bolt action hunting rifle with the legal capacity. You want an AR, join the military. Enough is enough, and time to make them illegal. Feds did it before, it can be done again.
Response to ItsjustMe (Original post)
Post removed
newdayneeded
(2,493 posts)back at the last 15 years and see what the choice of weapon is for mass shootings. Almost always a AR15 or Bushmaster.
Zeitghost
(4,557 posts)In a very small percentage of shootings overall. And yet we focus almost entirely on them.
Aussie105
(7,905 posts)I guess if you quote the percentage of people killed with an AR-15 of the total who die from old age, car accidents and disease every year you would get a very low number.
But it's a fallacy - someone shoots at you with an AR-15, and you are either 100% dead or he misses and you are 0% dead.
In short, a statistic for a whole group doesn't apply in a single instance.
But the focus on the AR-15 - surely getting those out of the hands of civilians, banning tyheir manufacture, sale and supply of ammunition, would be a good place to start?
Do that first, then move on to other lethal weapon.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)No. If you compare the number of people killed with an AR-15 style rifle to the number of people killed with other firearms -- mainly handguns -- you get a very low number.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls
Do that first, then move on to other lethal weapon.
So your ultimate goal is total disarmament of the civilian population? Because all guns can be lethal, y'now. So first the low-hanging fruit, and then work your way up the tree?
And people keep telling me that there is no slippery slope toward a total gun ban. Are they liars, or are they fools?
Zeitghost
(4,557 posts)Handguns account for something like 90% of gun deaths. It's not like it's even close.
Yet how many threads with clever memes or gruesome facts have you seen here on DU or elsewhere in social media about handguns or 9mm ammunition? Why do they want us to focus so hard on 3% of the problem?
Calista241
(5,633 posts)It doesn't do anything different or significantly better than any other handgun or rifle platform. It's just the most common rifle platform out there. Bushmaster is just a brand, like Ford or Toyota.
If the AR went away, or all rifles went away, people that want to do this kind of thing would just switch to something more available.
And mass shootings get a significant amount of media coverage, but at the end of the day, they're a super small percentage of gun violence plaguing our country.
My fear is that we are spending a huge amount of political capital on something that won't make much difference at the end of the day.
Mister Ed
(6,924 posts)Could you really do with a handgun what was done at Las Vegas, at Sandy Hook, at Parkland?
hack89
(39,181 posts)Virginia Tech is the second deadliest mass shooting with 32 dead. All with a handgun.
Mister Ed
(6,924 posts)Can a pistol really produce the sorts of wounds that were inflicted on kids at Sandy Hook and Parkland? (video links below)
If it's true, as poster #51 claims, that an assault rifle can do nothing that a handgun won't, then I wonder why our troops in the field are burdened with such a heavy and cumbersome weapon when they could just carry a pistol.
That poster's claim is absurd and untenable.
At 3:00:
At 2:30:
?t=150
At 3:29:
?t=209
at 3:09:
?t=189
hack89
(39,181 posts)A rifle can kill at 100s of yards. The effective range of a pistol is 50 yards on a good day. Did you even think about what war is all about before posting that?
Adam Lanza left a shotgun in his car. That would work perfectly fine for blasting open a door.
A man killed 32 adults with a pistol so it appears to me that comparisons to rifle bullets is irrelevant - dead is dead.
Mister Ed
(6,924 posts)I also understand that poster #51's claim that there is no practical difference between an AR-15 and a handgun is absurd and untenable. There are differences, and range is only one of them.
And, while dead is dead, there's wounded and then there's wounded - as the video links I've provided make clear.
hack89
(39,181 posts)The fact remains that that the second deadliest mass shooting was done with a pistol. Additionally, for every person killed by a rifle, 9 are killed by a handgun. So if you can’t prevent another Va Tech then you have not made America significantly safer.
Every assault weapon could magically disappear and the carnage will continue unabated.
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)my first tour I was issued an M-14 and a Colt .45 side arm, my second tour, I was issued an M-16A1, (which I hated, would rather have had an M-14), and a Colt .45 side arm, in Desert Storm, I was issued an M-16A2, (much better weapon) and my side arm was an M-19 Barretta 9mm.
I saw up close and personal what these rounds do to flesh, and it ain't pretty, but just about any round will do horrible damage to human flesh.
Mister Ed
(6,924 posts)Poster #51's assertion that there is no practical difference between the two is patently absurd. I'm surprised that it's generated its own sub-thread.
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)
Shipwack
(3,061 posts)... makes me think we need "The Gunsplainer".
former9thward
(33,424 posts)It wrecks a lot of good rants.
Mister Ed
(6,924 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts) ShazzieB
(22,568 posts)God, I needed this. 
liberal N proud
(61,194 posts)The gun nuts have this vision that makes the gun more important to them then their own family
Kennah
(14,578 posts)Federalist Paper #29 clarifies that a well-regulated militia means "a tolerable expertness in military movements" but also states that it would be "injurious" to the nation to attempt this.
Perpich v DOD (1990) said three militias exist: federal, state, and reserve or unorganized.
Since the 1903 Efficiency in Militia Act, or Dick Act, the reserves and state guard have been declared part of the federal militia (U.S. military) when called up by the President, which overrides a call by the Governor.
So the federal militia is the U.S. military and includes the reserves and guard when called up by the President.
Organized state militias exist in some states, but I don't think they'd last long against the U.S. military if a state plans to rely upon them for secession.
Then we get to the reserve or unorganized militia. Per 10 USC 246, those eligible to be called up are men aged 17 to 45 and women who are members of the National Guard.
Finally, suppose one draws conspicuous attention to the 20 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. In those conflicts, one must conclude that no one fights and kills extremely determined, fit, well-trained, young insurgents like the U.S. military. Meal Team 6 wasn't fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The idea that fat, middle-aged guys will fight off the U.S. military is beyond silly.
Sorry NRA, but the days of the militia in 1788 are nothing remotely resembling 2023.
Also NRA, you were founded by Union military officers to teach civilian marksmanship because:
- More Union soldiers than Confederate soldiers died during the American Civil War
- Confederate soldiers were more likely to have learned to use firearms and achieved proficiency with firearms before they marched off to war
- Those same Union military officers were concerned that threats of the South rising again might soon become a reality, and they wanted to be prepared
NRA was founded by those who fought and defeated insurrectionists, but it's been taken over by those espousing insurrection.
intelpug
(159 posts)So, Is this the U S Marine Corp's official position on this subject?
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,058 posts)It's the position of a former Marine, not the official position of the U.S. Marine Corps.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)... does to a body? Wilderness guides and game wardens in grizzly bear country know. That's why they carry shotguns instead of AR-15s.
Emile
(42,233 posts) Kaleva
(40,352 posts)"Many such readymade slug guns perform more like a rifle than a shotgun, with effective ranges in excess of 200 yards. "
https://www.themeateater.com/gear/gear-hunt/hunting-slug-guns
Emile
(42,233 posts)velocity of the 12 gauge slug is greatly reduced.
Kaleva
(40,352 posts)I can't find any that support your statement.
Emile
(42,233 posts)Shotgun slugs don’t fly as far as bullets fired from high-powered rifles and are therefore safer for use in areas with high densities of people, cars, and buildings.
Kaleva
(40,352 posts)I'm not saying you are wrong but I can't find sources to support your claim
The AR-15 chambered for the .223 Remington isn't considered a high powered rifle. A AR-10 chambered for the .308 or similiar round is considered to be high powered.
While one would use an AR-10 to hunt grizzly, elk, moose, bison, and big horn sheep, you wouldn't use a AR-15 for such as it isn't powerful enough.
"The 12-gauge shotgun is one of the most-used and most-effective firearms used in Alaska for bear protection. Part of that is related to price, as an effective shotgun platform, like the Mossberg 500 or 590A1, is a fraction of the cost of a rifle. The other part of the 12-gauge’s prominence is its impressive stopping power when paired with a slug."
https://resources.mossberg.com/journal/8-great-cartridges-for-bear-hunting
Zeitghost
(4,557 posts)12 gauge slugs offer tremendous stopping power at close range. But they are heavy, slow and are shot out of a smooth bore shotgun instead of rifled barrel. Making them a poor choice at ranges past 100 yards.
Kaleva
(40,352 posts)That's why they have an effective range of 200 yards or so.
I think we are both correct but we are talking about two different types of shotguns so that is where the confusion comes from .
yagotme
(4,135 posts)The old "pumpkin slug" isn't used nearly as often now, either. Newer sabot rounds offer higher velocity and better downrange performance, bringing the 12 gauge to a pretty much 200 yd effectiveness. Yes, the old slugs had a 70-80 yd performance history, but that has been surpassed, like technology always does.
Straw Man
(6,943 posts)The Las Vegas massacre is the only one I can think of.
Emile
(42,233 posts)of a mass murderer. But to answer your question, very few other than Las Vegas.
Paladin
(32,354 posts)Gotta keep the really important matters at the forefront of a crucial argument like this!
judesedit
(4,592 posts)Mr. Steve
(114 posts)No weapons without training and a definite necessity
madville
(7,847 posts)The AR-15 platform can be chambered in many different calibers of ammunition, and hundreds of other rifle models use it as well. Just focusing on the 5.56 chambering itself gives a false impression that it’s the actual problem that needs to be solved, there’s nothing special about it other than it’s prevalence due to being the round the military has used for 50 years.
The vast majority of people don’t even use actual 5.56 ammunition in their AR rifles, they buy .223 REM which is just slightly smaller and fine to shoot in a 5.56 rifle. 223 REM is what is commonly sold on the civilian market.
llashram
(6,269 posts)
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Our politicians are not respecting the vast majority of voters.
ExWhoDoesntCare
(4,741 posts)In the past 50 years?
It did zilch for stopping our support for the Central American follies.
It did zilch for stopping the invasion of Iraq.
It did zilch for keeping abortion legal.
It did zilch for ending economic inequality.
It's done close to nothing to reform the police or improve race relations.
Why do people insist on doing the same tired things that haven't worked before?
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Israel
Germany
Sitting on your hands will do nothing but continue to get mutilated children ignored.
All I ever here or read is how nothing will work. I never see solutions offered!
The Americans who want the mutilation of children stopped are in the vast majority.
Our leaders need a wake up call.
Change does not come easily. Many of the things you mention are headed in the right direction.
To say our protest and voting record on the abortion issue has had no effect is just not reality.
We are well above 15.
Police are listening and change is happening.
Keep the pressure on.
I will send my congressman another email asking how many mutilated children this week.
Repeal the 2nd!
SYFROYH
(34,214 posts)...because it has been deemed not effective enough in military combat.
What does that mean for his logic now?
sanatanadharma
(4,089 posts)OK, after reading the currently 100 replies, It seems to me that those who 'know' are are awfully argumentative.
Nobody seems able to settle on the best choice for a killing machine.
But apparently if one wants to kill many at a distance, certain gun looks are de rigor.
Clearly there are too many who who appreciate their tools more than life itself.
Technical arguments out number moral arguments.
Centuries old thinking puts down (like suppressive fire) new thinking about most-modern-of times needs that require 10 step solutions, not 2nd hand-me-down addictions.