General Discussion

-none

(1,884 posts)

77. A simple solution to the mass fire weapons.

Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:48 AM

Jun 2016

Outlaw removable magazines. Make them built in, a integral part of the weapon. Limit to a maximum of 6 to 8 shots, before needing to reload.
What does a civilian need with a 30 round magazine for? Except for mass shooting, there is no real need for that many shots.

We need to tighten up background checks. Any weapon transfers, need the proper paperwork and go through federally licensed firearm dealers. Waiting periods to make sure everything is correct.
The owner of any firearm used in a crime, is an accessory to the crime, unless the firearm is reported stolen before the crime, or a short reasonable afterwards.
Make firearm owners responsible for their weapons, with stiff penalties for misuse.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

135 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Don't call it an assault weapon. [View all] Jerry442 Jun 2016 OP

I overheard some idiots the other day tut-tutting The_Casual_Observer Jun 2016 #1

Recognize? Probably not. But MSM/Controllers can't do it days later in the bright of day... Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #19

How about we ban any magazine for any weapon with a capacity of over 6 shots. CanonRay Jun 2016 #76

That would be a defacto ban on 99.9% of semiautomatic pistols. As such, it would be unconstitional. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #79

Maybe. Maybe not. It doesn't infringe on anyone's right to bear arms. CanonRay Jun 2016 #85

I don't think you know what "infringe" means. Straw Man Jun 2016 #98

Actually, I do CanonRay Jun 2016 #101

Yes, we can. Straw Man Jun 2016 #105

No. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #91

Fuck conciliatory. I've had 30 years of being conciliatory with these assholes CanonRay Jun 2016 #102

No "flame away." Just expect more of the same. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #103

I'm mostly against gun control... NaturalHigh Jun 2016 #123

You seem to be confusing "assault rifle" with "assault weapon". ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #2

So AWs are just fru-fru versions of plain old guns? Jerry442 Jun 2016 #4

Yep TeddyR Jun 2016 #6

What is a "plain old gun"? Straw Man Jun 2016 #9

So, what was the point of fighting tooth and nail to defeat the AW ban... Jerry442 Jun 2016 #14

The obvious point: The next move wil be more bans. Right? nt Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #21

And there it is. Jerry442 Jun 2016 #45

I'm more than willing to compromise and work together to lower gun violence TeddyR Jun 2016 #57

Apparently ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #63

There it is indeed, Jerry. Virtually every discussion here, and in the agitprop of banner groups... Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #90

And Di-Fi lancer78 Jun 2016 #128

Same thing happens lancer78 Jun 2016 #127

Because then we have to buy the top one instead of the bottom.. jmg257 Jun 2016 #37

Well, deaniac21 Jun 2016 #55

Because once that ban was in place ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #62

Fine, restrict hell out of both and anyone who tries to buy one, the ultimate catch-22 for gunners. Hoyt Jun 2016 #15

Well, at least that idea would be based on logic. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #16

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #27

Yes, the only difference is the looks. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #18

You can take a wooden-stocked mini-14, change the stock to a pistol gripped folding stock.. X_Digger Jun 2016 #36

Yes (nt) Recursion Jun 2016 #71

If you want to play semantic games ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #3

Not much different than this, you say. Jerry442 Jun 2016 #10

Very different from that. Straw Man Jun 2016 #12

By the same token . . . gratuitous Jun 2016 #5

Well, crap. Brickbat Jun 2016 #7

Yeah, forget it. For some, ignorance is a badge of honor. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #34

It's frustrating. Ignorance leads to bad bills, which leads to Democrats losing elctions. Brickbat Jun 2016 #38

Always entertaining to pin down Gun Enthusiasts as to the Nazi origins of the terminology. (nt) Paladin Jun 2016 #8

What terminology? Straw Man Jun 2016 #11

Nice tap dance. (nt) Paladin Jun 2016 #13

Usually ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #61

The modern-day Bundeswehr just calls them "rifles" jmowreader Jun 2016 #116

Are we supposed to feel bad about that?nt hack89 Jun 2016 #28

Assault Rifles are capable of FULL-AUTO fire; the bowlderlized assault weapon is not. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #17

707 HP Hellcat Hemi says hello Aerows Jun 2016 #20

So, the Hellcat will be running the 400 next month? Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #23

Missed the point you wanted to miss. Aerows Jun 2016 #24

Ok, a spoiler on a Honda doesn't mean its an F-16 with an airfoil. Howzat? Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #87

The 707 HP Hellcat Hemi is also... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2016 #40

Is an M16 capable of full-auto fire? Is an AR15 capable of full auto fire? Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #88

You can use an AR15 as an assault weapon. Ergonomics plays a major role in how fast a Exilednight Jun 2016 #43

That doesn't fit the method. Aerows Jun 2016 #48

The Guardian TeddyR Jun 2016 #58

Actually, not so much. Straw Man Jun 2016 #66

Is the Assault Rifle the formal description of a full-auto weapon? Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #89

Depends on who you ask. Exilednight Jun 2016 #92

I was talking earlier with someone about cars. A Dodge. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #94

I don't get your point, if you're trying to make one. Exilednight Jun 2016 #104

Full-auto or burst mode is a requirement. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #96

Call it a semi-automatic rifle Matrosov Jun 2016 #22

Here's a video of a legal semi-automatic weapon Buzz cook Jun 2016 #25

Remember that bump-fire requires a special stock. Straw Man Jun 2016 #97

No it doesn't "require" a special stock Buzz cook Jun 2016 #111

You posted videos of bump-fire stocks. Straw Man Jun 2016 #112

I have read and heard the term used for both Buzz cook Jun 2016 #118

It's still wrong. Straw Man Jun 2016 #120

Actually, the Soviets with the PPSH-41 gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #26

Came up with a damn fine tank, too. tabasco Jun 2016 #30

Problem was not armor protection gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #44

The Sherman was never designed to fight other tanks oneshooter Jun 2016 #47

American tactical gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #53

Yeah, it was a problem. tabasco Jun 2016 #73

Not really gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #110

There's a lot of 3rd Armored Div. vets who disagree with you. tabasco Jun 2016 #119

The Tiger at 54 tons, out classed every Medium tank in the world gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #121

I'm sure the original M-16 has its defenders, as well tabasco Jun 2016 #122

Maybe your should read gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #126

The one advantage the Sherman had was speed. oneshooter Jun 2016 #130

Same with tohe Soviet built T-34 gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #131

Thanks for the info. tabasco Jun 2016 #132

I am sure these are kills claimed by gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #133

I'm not so sure tabasco Jun 2016 #134

Your are correct gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #135

The PPSH-41 was a submachinegun, not an assault rifle. Adrahil Jun 2016 #33

Thanks. gladium et scutum Jun 2016 #42

I guess it's a real pisser Aerows Jun 2016 #49

My interest in them is as historical artifacts. Adrahil Jun 2016 #51

Here we go. Aerows Jun 2016 #52

You missed the part where I said I don't want one. Adrahil Jun 2016 #54

You weren't the one complaining about it Aerows Jun 2016 #56

Thanks for the snark, much appreciated. Adrahil Jun 2016 #75

"I guess it's a real pisser that we can't strut around with UZI's" Actually you can... EX500rider Jun 2016 #106

A prototype assault rifle was the Russian Federov Automat of WW1. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #78

Interesting. The BAR was headed that way, but too big and heavy to be practical. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #83

The BAR was an excellent light machine gun by WW1 standards, but it cane out too late Just reading posts Jun 2016 #93

Agree. Interesting history. NT Adrahil Jun 2016 #95

The BAR was developed for assulting fixed dug in positions. oneshooter Jun 2016 #107

I'm just pointing out that in WW2 there were LMGs that were arguably better. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #113

Marines hitting Tinian had a different opinion One_Life_To_Give Jun 2016 #109

Of course...that was what was available. But the Bren Gun and MG42 (just to name a couple) were Just reading posts Jun 2016 #114

there are two differences between the traditional "battle" rifle Angel Martin Jun 2016 #29

Which doesn't mean a damn thing Aerows Jun 2016 #50

So you also want to ban semi-auto pistols? TeddyR Jun 2016 #59

Oh for fuck's sake. Odin2005 Jun 2016 #31

Call it what? "BANGIE MCBANGBANG"???? longship Jun 2016 #32

CALL IT AN ASSAULT RIFLE. Paladin Jun 2016 #35

As long as you can describe it in legislation, they may be called whatever you like. jmg257 Jun 2016 #39

That brings you back to describing the rifle based on its looks. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #69

Actually not the point of this thread, or my post, so not addressed. jmg257 Jun 2016 #74

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #41

I'd love to see these folks show up at the NRA convention... Jerry442 Jun 2016 #46

Why? TeddyR Jun 2016 #60

If you believe the gun people posting here... Jerry442 Jun 2016 #65

gun humpers are not known for their intellect Skittles Jun 2016 #64

Banners see falsehoods as mere sport. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #99

I call them "weapons of mass destruction". Initech Jun 2016 #67

Actually ... Straw Man Jun 2016 #68

"50 people in 20 minutes" ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #70

1984 called, they want their newspeak back n/t Taitertots Jun 2016 #72

A simple solution to the mass fire weapons. -none Jun 2016 #77

And what about the (roughly) 200 million semautomatic weapons already in circulation, Just reading posts Jun 2016 #81

Any used illegally, destroy. -none Jun 2016 #82

**Fist bump** NT Jerry442 Jun 2016 #84

If you only destroy the tiny fraction of the billions of magazines used in crimes, they'll be here Just reading posts Jun 2016 #115

Oh swell, another thread full of gun porn. Piss on guns. hunter Jun 2016 #80

I believe the OP supports gun control. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #100

Gun control wont happen until it's made socially unacceptable like smoking or drunk driving. hunter Jun 2016 #108

When looking for enemies, things can get confusing. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #124

I'm not confused in the least. Piss on guns. hunter Jun 2016 #125

Yes NT Jerry442 Jun 2016 #117

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #86

Call them "weapons of war", or "military weapons". backscatter712 Jun 2016 #129