Gun Control & RKBA

DirkGently

(12,151 posts)

23. If that were true, there'd be no market for the combat weapon.

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:27 AM

Apr 2012

Of course design matters. There's no way around that. Saying that you can use a weapon design for killing people for hunting is like saying you can use a bowling ball to roll flour. You could, but no one actually believes that's what it's for. Power, weight, capacity, range, conceal-ability, accuracy. These are all factors gun enthusiasts themselves ponder endlessly, BECAUSE it matters.

So all this patronizing, arch dismissal of these concerns as being founded on ignorance is a smokescreen. Everyone thinks weapons should be designed differently for killing people versus other uses.

A logical pro-gun position would be that killing people is a legitimate purpose. Not a great position, but at least logical. Pretending everything that gun manufacturers, military and police forces, and enthusiasts themselves put such great stock in when choosing their weapons doesn't actually mean anything is not logical.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

110 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

assault rifles gettting some more play time. Been a busy two years! [View all] MichaelHarris Apr 2012 OP

wally-world had 7 AR variants on the shelf today. ileus Apr 2012 #1

My friend bought one of those .22 AR's. LAGC Apr 2012 #14

The Locksmith who was murdered was a close family friend of one of my the guys he works with. Ecumenist Apr 2012 #2

Blah, blah, blah, anti-gun zealot talking points. rl6214 Apr 2012 #6

but the 5.56 and 7.62x39 are super high powered when in a pistol grip rifle. ileus Apr 2012 #7

Actually, genuis, my husband is a GUN COLLECTOR and has a number of them Ecumenist Apr 2012 #30

Well here's a pot... Clames Apr 2012 #42

A wasted mind is an awful thing to behold.....You make as much sense as a mud window but Ecumenist Apr 2012 #54

My suspicion is that Clames will be around here a lot longer than a potty mouthed rl6214 Apr 2012 #105

And that really dosen't mean he knows squat about guns rl6214 Apr 2012 #77

And you know what? you would do yourself a HUGE favor by taking a bit of your own fucking advice- Ecumenist Apr 2012 #78

"I don't assume anything about anyone " rl6214 Apr 2012 #80

Noticed you didn't add anything of substance but that's what I expected. Once again, talk is cheap Ecumenist Apr 2012 #94

Yeah, talk is cheap and I don't feel the need to try to boost my credibility by posting rl6214 Apr 2012 #104

You lot do tend to act out a lot when pressed, don't you? friendly_iconoclast Apr 2012 #81

And if i gave a fuck, it would matter to me. Ecumenist Apr 2012 #91

This gun is a weapon of war: Johnny Rico Apr 2012 #8

Very sorry to hear about your/their loss. Straw Man Apr 2012 #12

Isn't that a pretty obvious obfuscation? DirkGently Apr 2012 #18

nice rant gejohnston Apr 2012 #19

What does the "AR" in AR-15 stand for? DirkGently Apr 2012 #24

AR? sarisataka Apr 2012 #27

Hey, I knew that. Did you know it has always been called an "Assault Rifle?" DirkGently Apr 2012 #85

Funny... sarisataka Apr 2012 #86

Armalite nt hack89 Apr 2012 #44

Simple Google search... Clames Apr 2012 #45

Any response to the substance of the post? DirkGently Apr 2012 #83

I will... Clames Apr 2012 #109

Not really when you look at their abilities sarisataka Apr 2012 #20

If that were true, there'd be no market for the combat weapon. DirkGently Apr 2012 #23

Several reasons sarisataka Apr 2012 #28

Problem is gun enthusiasts often stop at "Well, technically, that's not the case" DirkGently Apr 2012 #87

The history of the debate... sarisataka Apr 2012 #90

My perception of the history of the debate is that regulation is conflated with "ban" & dismissed. DirkGently Apr 2012 #92

Agreed, in principle sarisataka Apr 2012 #95

I'd like to see the educated, gun-savvy proposal for sensible restrictions. DirkGently Apr 2012 #100

you won't see one dominated by the VPC or Brady. gejohnston Apr 2012 #103

There is a level of ergonomics more suitable for tactical situations than others krispos42 Apr 2012 #41

The question is simply whether, on balance, it's reasonable to restrict people-killing design. DirkGently Apr 2012 #89

SMGs are innaccurate. gejohnston Apr 2012 #93

Well, that's the rub krispos42 Apr 2012 #107

These are people trying to legislate morality. To them, good ergonomics are evil. friendly_iconoclast Apr 2012 #108

Answer below Travis_0004 Apr 2012 #25

I didn't call for a ban of anything. But the idea that only the ignorant would, is ignorant. DirkGently Apr 2012 #98

The second amendment is about weapons of war. Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #65

Refreshing to hear someone admit that. Now ... DirkGently Apr 2012 #84

project much? gejohnston Apr 2012 #88

I'm curious.. what 'design elements' are neither sporting, nor military and.. X_Digger Apr 2012 #96

There's no right to military weapons. Nice try. DirkGently Apr 2012 #99

have to correct something gejohnston Apr 2012 #101

It's your concept, own it. X_Digger Apr 2012 #102

Answers. Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #106

No. Straw Man Apr 2012 #75

A phillips-head screwdriver is an excellent tool for rotating a petronius Apr 2012 #97

Of course they are for war. The second amendment is ABOUT war. Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #63

Thank you Atypical Liberal. I have a problem with people who try to expand the 2nd amendment Ecumenist Apr 2012 #66

I have a problem with people who have no clue gejohnston Apr 2012 #67

There is something I really would LOVE to say to something as ignorant as this post but my mother Ecumenist Apr 2012 #68

my aren't we pissed off gejohnston Apr 2012 #69

You know, don't care what you think and as far as I'm concerned, you don't exist. I believe Ecumenist Apr 2012 #70

I believe what I believe gejohnston Apr 2012 #71

That much is true BUT you came at me with a viciousness and assumption that went far beyond the Ecumenist Apr 2012 #72

apology and clarification gejohnston Apr 2012 #73

I'm sorry too. I didn't mean the name Billy Bob as a disrespect to southerners. My husband Ecumenist Apr 2012 #76

The second amendment does not preclude self-defense. Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #74

still does not change the fact that gejohnston Apr 2012 #3

May I have a hard and fast definition of what makes a rifle "high powered", please? Johnny Rico Apr 2012 #4

I have $5 that says you won't get an answer. PavePusher Apr 2012 #9

I don't think I'll take that bet. Johnny Rico Apr 2012 #13

I think we need to go higher than that.... PavePusher Apr 2012 #17

My own bias is in terms of North American hunting, Johnny Rico Apr 2012 #43

I wish I had one too. Unfortunately, I aquired the taste and desire... PavePusher Apr 2012 #48

Send me $100 and I'll tell you the winning numbers shadowrider Apr 2012 #50

I'll get right on that. PavePusher Apr 2012 #55

I suppose you'll send me $1000 by mistake and I have shadowrider Apr 2012 #57

Ah, you've done this before. PavePusher Apr 2012 #58

Smartass shadowrider Apr 2012 #61

The most powerful gun currently in my collection is a Browning BAR in .300 Win Mag. Johnny Rico Apr 2012 #53

More "NRA Talking Points"! DonP Apr 2012 #15

Don't forget shadowrider Apr 2012 #31

Anything not powered by a spring.... ileus Apr 2012 #37

Until it's posted exactly what type of weapon he had, that article is rl6214 Apr 2012 #5

Please list, by name and/or model... PavePusher Apr 2012 #10

I've only ever target shot with my high powered AR and no one around me had "dropped like flies"... OneTenthofOnePercent Apr 2012 #11

So, uh, how much do you want for it? Dr_Scholl Apr 2012 #22

.308? Callisto32 Apr 2012 #35

LR-308C with Floated quadrail. OneTenthofOnePercent Apr 2012 #47

chewy 308 goodness....what bi-pod is that? ileus Apr 2012 #38

VLTOR ModPod OneTenthofOnePercent Apr 2012 #46

Gun permit was revoked yamihere Apr 2012 #16

Blame lazy cops... jenwilson Apr 2012 #21

No Callisto32 Apr 2012 #34

No...it's the guns fault...blame the guns. ileus Apr 2012 #39

While a Catch 22, I think anyone who wants to purchase such weapons should be banned from owning Hoyt Apr 2012 #26

Hmmm. Callisto32 Apr 2012 #33

Please define... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #49

See your tribute thread to "assault weapons." Hoyt Apr 2012 #52

No appearances here... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #59

What if they're not used as weapons? ileus Apr 2012 #56

Ya know, if you want to be taken seriously... eqfan592 Apr 2012 #29

Depends on one's perspective. I think it's a serious OP. Lots of people do. Hoyt Apr 2012 #40

Harvy Strawman, Attorney at Law.. Callisto32 Apr 2012 #32

By definition, an assault rifle is chambered for an intermediate caliber. Callisto32 Apr 2012 #36

I have yet to read... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #51

"high-powered"... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2012 #60

Oh look, more 'stats by nooz reports'. X_Digger Apr 2012 #62

Or anyone carrying an AK-47 in Moscow, Idaho? friendly_iconoclast Apr 2012 #82

All rifles combined only kill about 300 people each year. Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #64

do you always put gejohnston Apr 2012 #79

Post removed Post removed May 2012 #110