General Discussion

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)

30. The you have to define the FEATURES that define the model.

Tue Jun 14, 2016, 07:58 AM

Jun 2016

Otherwise, the manufacturer could just change the finish, or the stock, or the sights.... whatever.

Heck, interestingly, if this WAS a "Black Mamba" rifle, it's not even an actual AR-15.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

138 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can we agree to ban the weapon used by the mass murderer? [View all] yardwork Jun 2016 OP

And leave the AK? ileus Jun 2016 #1

Apparently we're frozen in immobility due to a lack of definitions. yardwork Jun 2016 #3

And that frozen in immobility is the intent of the definitions game stevenleser Jun 2016 #18

precisely. spanone Jun 2016 #37

Exactly rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #41

That's the point of this OP. yardwork Jun 2016 #64

Include it too. This is what Mr. Kalashnikov himself... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #62

That suggestion would leave the AR, too. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #96

He had two from what I understand philosslayer Jun 2016 #2

Did that weapon kill 49 people in seconds? If so, ban that too. yardwork Jun 2016 #4

You want to ban Glocks? Do you really think that's a realistic goal? Just reading posts Jun 2016 #58

I don't think a Glock is capable of killing dozens of people in seconds. yardwork Jun 2016 #74

It fires every bit as fast as the rifle he used, and can accept magazines holding over 30 rounds. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #76

A Glock can fire around 16 rounds in well under 10 seconds TeddyR Jun 2016 #81

Nice diversion rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #42

Thank you. yardwork Jun 2016 #65

I too grew up hunting - in rural NY. Semi auto rifles (742) and shotguns (1100, A5) jmg257 Jun 2016 #103

MCX doesn't use a clip deaniac21 Jun 2016 #136

those asshole cowards carry the handgun to suicide themself. Sunlei Jun 2016 #111

He didn't. linuxman Jun 2016 #127

He knew the police would, when he stoodup and ran at them. Sunlei Jun 2016 #130

Then what was the pistol for? linuxman Jun 2016 #134

to suicide himself, like these assholes always try to do. Sunlei Jun 2016 #135

You can agree all you like and it won't change the ruling of SCOTUS... pipoman Jun 2016 #5

Let's just sidestep the name barrier, eh? yardwork Jun 2016 #6

No, in all likelihood these are sold as recreational sporting rifles pipoman Jun 2016 #12

"Its only purpose is mass murder"? No, I cannot agree with that. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #13

Bully for you. Some people have pet king cobras, but they're still illegal. yardwork Jun 2016 #25

Yes, but I have the 2nd Amendment with protects the liberty to own commonly used firearms aikoaiko Jun 2016 #32

I use mine for competitive target shooting hack89 Jun 2016 #16

You aren't allowed to own a pet tiger, though. yardwork Jun 2016 #26

But I am allowed to own semiautomatic rifles hack89 Jun 2016 #36

You must be so proud. yardwork Jun 2016 #67

Why would I be? hack89 Jun 2016 #69

You sound proud. Your gun is "cool" according to you. yardwork Jun 2016 #71

I was just feeding your words back to you. hack89 Jun 2016 #73

While you play word games, 49 people are dead. yardwork Jun 2016 #77

No. Gun ownership is a serious matter hack89 Jun 2016 #79

It must be a game to you. Your rediculous argument gets mauled and handed back to you... cleanhippie Jun 2016 #102

Not really... EX500rider Jun 2016 #137

Yet that's obviously NOT the purpose to which the extant tens of millions are actually used. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #98

We shouldn't defeat this notion because of syntax, make it ANY device DESIGNED to kill humans ... uponit7771 Jun 2016 #8

You can make it anything you wish, won't....can't happen... pipoman Jun 2016 #9

OK, so people are allowed to carry grenades? No.. they're not, so it will happen if we vote for uponit7771 Jun 2016 #10

This is asked and answered many many times... pipoman Jun 2016 #15

In that case I'll take common sense regulation, place the same barriers to owning a gun as there uponit7771 Jun 2016 #47

Any "barriers" which can be applie to one civil liberty/right pipoman Jun 2016 #53

How is "relatively efficiently" defined? Rifles with 5 round magazines did the job relatively... Marengo Jun 2016 #100

More efficiently than a musket for a start... we can move down from there... a rock or bow and uponit7771 Jun 2016 #118

Most likely, the bolt action with up to 5 round magazine is the baseline... Marengo Jun 2016 #126

That sounds practical, I'm sure someone in congress has presented it but its been smacked down by uponit7771 Jun 2016 #128

We can elect Clinton rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #43

And yours as well, gun owner? Marengo Jun 2016 #45

Nope rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #48

Actually, no one really needs a gun to hunt... Marengo Jun 2016 #60

Just like the conservative judges have overturned Roe... pipoman Jun 2016 #49

No see rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #52

I read an article on The Atlantic last week TeddyR Jun 2016 #85

That's a way too, just change the SCOTUS laws and enact whats in the best interest of the electorate uponit7771 Jun 2016 #50

It's how the right has operated rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #56

+1, 2000 was a really horrible decision uponit7771 Jun 2016 #59

Do you really think it is that hard? Uponthegears Jun 2016 #66

SCOTUS: Is the firearm "in common use for lawful purposes"? pipoman Jun 2016 #70

Writing laws is easy, writing laws that are constitutional is harder. nt jmg257 Jun 2016 #106

That law would easily be held constitutional Uponthegears Jun 2016 #117

No thanks, I have a career. Besides I do not think I was being smug, or snide at all. jmg257 Jun 2016 #122

Well dang Uponthegears Jun 2016 #131

Lol! Good stuff though, so no harm no foul! Cheers! nt jmg257 Jun 2016 #133

Make it harder to get any devices DESIGNED to kill a lot of people than it is to drive a car.... uponit7771 Jun 2016 #7

You mean that you wish to ban the Sig Sauer MCX? aikoaiko Jun 2016 #11

One is better than none. Let's start somewhere and stop the foolish games. yardwork Jun 2016 #23

No, because it is pointless. We learned this from the 1994 AWB that banned some guns by name aikoaiko Jun 2016 #29

+1 Just reading posts Jun 2016 #55

All two or three thousand of 'em! Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #95

I guess I better buy one now before yardwork's ban goes into effect. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #104

Can the manufacturer change the name and have THOSE legal? jmg257 Jun 2016 #14

Nope. No names. yardwork Jun 2016 #24

The you have to define the FEATURES that define the model. Adrahil Jun 2016 #30

My point is that the argument over definitions keeps us from doing anything. yardwork Jun 2016 #72

See post #75. It matters. Adrahil Jun 2016 #78

We could also just ban everything until "they" can come up with some workable definitions. nt gollygee Jun 2016 #17

I'm on board with that. Tired of the games and obstructionism. yardwork Jun 2016 #21

And that's why we have the 2nd Amendment. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #125

Sigh. "Semi-automatic" is very easily defined and can be banned with a single signature Recursion Jun 2016 #19

Go for it. yardwork Jun 2016 #22

Oh we will rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #44

You are correct. But good luck with that. Adrahil Jun 2016 #27

I agree on both counts. I'd even back a semi-auto ban Recursion Jun 2016 #35

"semi-auto with detachable mags, and semi-autos with fixed mags over 10 rounds" jmg257 Jun 2016 #51

I'm actually OK with fixed-mag semi-autos Recursion Jun 2016 #57

CA tried it - just went about it poorly. It is a compromise indeed. jmg257 Jun 2016 #61

Nothing about that poses a Constitutional question Recursion Jun 2016 #80

Hmm...tough call I would think...interesting! nt. jmg257 Jun 2016 #84

Just read on motherjones it was a sig "black mamba"..so yes let's ban it. ileus Jun 2016 #20

The Black Mamba isn't even an actual AR-15. Adrahil Jun 2016 #31

Oh well then rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #46

You miss the point. Adrahil Jun 2016 #75

No, I don't miss rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #83

But that's not what you said, or what this thread was about. Adrahil Jun 2016 #86

Prior to Heller any of the things you propose TeddyR Jun 2016 #89

Then the solution is to ban the characteristics that they share Orrex Jun 2016 #87

Ummm rethink that a bit. Adrahil Jun 2016 #112

Well, it's sort of meant a starting point Orrex Jun 2016 #115

Okay. Good luck. Adrahil Jun 2016 #119

Let's suppose your idea was suggested in Congress. ... spin Jun 2016 #113

Consider the implication of what you're saying Orrex Jun 2016 #116

I agree that your post was just basically a rant against our current society. ... spin Jun 2016 #120

Then we largely agree Orrex Jun 2016 #121

In this nation there are at least 80,000,000 gun owners. ... spin Jun 2016 #124

you know SWAT used a similar firearm as a life saving machine. ileus Jun 2016 #90

SWAT are sworn and bonded police officers rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #101

I vote no. NaturalHigh Jun 2016 #28

The restriction should be on who is allowed to buy guns. FLPanhandle Jun 2016 #33

I prefer to ban all Assault weapons hertopos Jun 2016 #34

What is an "assault weapon" though? TeddyR Jun 2016 #40

Anything used for assault could be defined as an assault weapon, even a pool noodle ileus Jun 2016 #92

The same issue comes up with laws against "bath salts" and other synthetic marijuana substances. Brickbat Jun 2016 #38

No, we won't. Pointless and a politicial impossibility right now. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #39

Gun humpers have made this country into their version of Utopia. Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #54

We all have a say. It's time to speak up. yardwork Jun 2016 #63

I vote in every election. It hasn't changed anything yet. Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #82

I'm with you. AirmensMom Jun 2016 #88

I hope so! get the red out Jun 2016 #68

The Sig Sauer MCX was the weapon used by the Orlando shooter Calista241 Jun 2016 #91

I personally thinks the Second Amendment TeddyR Jun 2016 #93

Agreed. Such a broad ban on semi-autos woudl simply be ignored by the majority of owners. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #97

And this attitude is exactly why we have so many mass murders in the U.S. yardwork Jun 2016 #99

change headline, "The weapon used for the last FOUR American mass murders" Sunlei Jun 2016 #94

Yes - it would be a "start", but then we could buy these just fine: jmg257 Jun 2016 #109

I know, but we need A START before NEXT crazy hater tries to one-up the count score Sunlei Jun 2016 #110

I have fired that model of weapon Jester Messiah Jun 2016 #105

Isn't the semi-automatic like porn? The courts don't define that. They say they just valerief Jun 2016 #107

No TeddyR Jun 2016 #123

Except nil desperandum Jun 2016 #108

Can we agree to ban the words used by the mass murderer? DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #114

The words didn't kill anybody. More false equivalency games. yardwork Jun 2016 #138

Re-instating the deathrind Jun 2016 #129

The reality is doing so will have very little impact on overall bighart Jun 2016 #132