Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
23. the problem is the definition of "military style"
Thu Mar 14, 2013, 05:29 PM
Mar 2013

There is no set definition, no agreed upon standard. Every law is different and the weapons they ban/allow are radically different depending on how the law is written.

Why is a semi-automatic "hunting rifle" a-ok but if you stick a pistol grip on it its now a military weapon. Why are handguns ok? Aren't they used by the military? What about the pump action shotgun- the essence of a home defense gun is also present in many military arsenals. The fallacy here is the belief that all military weapons are designed for one single purpose- to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible- essentially they are all designed with a machine gun in mind. That is not the case. A military sniper rifle is picked because of accuracy at long distance and its ability to drop a 150lb man. Why are those requirements any different from a deer hunter, who needs a weapon that is accurate at long distance and can drop a 150lb deer? The weapon that they choose will be almost identical in function and capability.

also just listen term "military style". why does the "style" matter? For example, when you think of a sports car you think of things like a BMW M3, Lamborghini, Ferrari etc. My mother owns an Acura TL with the sport package- It is a "sport style" car with many features that are common in sports car but it is by no means considered a sports car. The same is with many guns that are banned under this legislation. what makes an AR-15 functionally different from a Remington 7600? Nothing. Or a benelli M4 and an M3 with no stock? nothing.

And why do you need to ban these weapons if you limit the magazines? 10 rounds out of an AR-15 isn't any quicker than 10 rounds out of a semi-auto "hunting rifle".

It comes down to this, the ban itself makes no sense and worst of all its- its a farse. It's sole purpose is to move the goal post incrementally. My feeling is if you want to institute a strict gun control regime like they have in UK then come out and say it- don't lie to my face and say its not about handgun bans and prohibition of self defense weapons- because it is.

Recommendations

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

Schumer made Cruz look like a fool Tempest Mar 2013 #1
Thank You, Sir. Paladin Mar 2013 #4
+1 progressoid Mar 2013 #10
Making Senator Cruz look like a fool sound like Jack Rabbit Mar 2013 #21
Where was Cruz when police attacked the Occupy camps that were peacefully petitioning JDPriestly Mar 2013 #22
just because we have limits on rights, doesn't mean all limits are constitutional bossy22 Mar 2013 #25
well.. the important thing is.. Phillip McCleod Mar 2013 #51
You tell him, Diane! SunSeeker Mar 2013 #2
Sen Cur Dog vlyons Mar 2013 #14
Good -- This guy, especially as a junior senator, is WAY ahead of himself whathehell Mar 2013 #3
The GOP should dislike Cruz perdita9 Mar 2013 #9
what do you mean The Wizard Mar 2013 #17
True, that. n/t whathehell Mar 2013 #52
Democrats need to talk like this consistently. There's no point in pretending you're having a tea yurbud Mar 2013 #5
As A Progressive Living in Texjezustan BlueManFan Mar 2013 #6
Is there anything right with Texas Teabaggery? OrwellwasRight Mar 2013 #33
Absolutely--The Laugh Out Loud Effect BlueManFan Mar 2013 #49
I'd have to read the transcript and/or see more video... CBHagman Mar 2013 #7
Cruz: Proof that stupid people go to Harvard perdita9 Mar 2013 #8
He's an ideologue, but he's far from stupid Ter Mar 2013 #20
Agree Inuca Mar 2013 #27
For some reason, Lee gets away with must more than Cruz or Rand Paul Ter Mar 2013 #30
You just know it chaps his ass leftynyc Mar 2013 #11
IMHO sheshe2 Mar 2013 #12
A junior male senator "mansplaining" to a senior female senator... what could go wrong? nt DRoseDARs Mar 2013 #13
His Entire BIO Is Barf Worthy HangOnKids Mar 2013 #19
A Canadian lecturing Dianne Feinstein on our Constitution? EC Mar 2013 #15
Gamers will appreciate my response Coolest Ranger Mar 2013 #16
Well, people have different views on John2 Mar 2013 #18
the problem is the definition of "military style" bossy22 Mar 2013 #23
What does not make sense is a weapon on the streets which are capable of blowing up people and Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #29
what is an AR15/AK47/bushmaster etc... bossy22 Mar 2013 #32
Maybe we should expend the ban, include all high caliber weapons, would that make your happier? Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #35
no, because it wouldn't be feasable bossy22 Mar 2013 #38
Then accept sensible weapons and get the weapons used in mass killings ban, we don't need our Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #40
You are missing my point bossy22 Mar 2013 #42
If the shooter is limited to firing only 10 rounds instead of 33 and more in other cases it would Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #46
so why not just go after magazine capacity bossy22 Mar 2013 #47
High capacity capabilities is on the table also but when the ammo explodes it is another problem. Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #48
What ammo "explodes"? N/T beevul Mar 2013 #59
That is what laws are for, to set standards. OrwellwasRight Mar 2013 #37
No I haven't bossy22 Mar 2013 #39
There is no logic in calling the Marianas Islands a state either. OrwellwasRight Mar 2013 #43
the marianas islands are not a state IIRC bossy22 Mar 2013 #44
Lots of people think they have legitmate gripes about a lot of things. OrwellwasRight Mar 2013 #45
Can you take your gun pics to the Guns Department? Kingofalldems Mar 2013 #50
No, Ms. Feinstein, you're not. You are a war profiteer, however. closeupready Mar 2013 #24
Either you are a TeaPublican troll or a TeaLeftist extremist purist. Either way, sell it elsewhere. RBInMaine Mar 2013 #36
Truth hurts doesn't it? ForgoTheConsequence Mar 2013 #41
Please refute the content rather than attack the poster. It's far to easy to say, I dislike what 24601 Mar 2013 #55
the more and more I see of this bossy22 Mar 2013 #26
Interesting how Feinstein rebuked Cruz without really saying anything derby378 Mar 2013 #28
Cruz is running true to form, you elect a TP candidate and you get stupid statements and run from Thinkingabout Mar 2013 #31
GOOD ! Now THAT is how you deal with a TeaCRAZY FUCKING BASTARD like Cruz. RBInMaine Mar 2013 #34
She should have walked up to him and smacked him davidpdx Mar 2013 #53
Because violence solves everything? 24601 Mar 2013 #56
No, violence doesn't solve everything davidpdx Mar 2013 #57
OK, I understand - it's OK escalate words to violence when you disapprove of the words. And you see 24601 Mar 2013 #60
Welcome to ignore davidpdx Mar 2013 #61
Better to have open exchange of information. 24601 Mar 2013 #62
Get Back To Us When You Have Information To Exchange. Paladin Mar 2013 #64
It's also OK to realize many visceral responses are just that... LanternWaste Mar 2013 #63
Meh. Teabagger squabbling with a Vichy Democrat. friendly_iconoclast Mar 2013 #54
+1000 Tom Ripley Mar 2013 #58
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Feinstein Snaps At Cruz: ...»Reply #23