Customer Discussions > Video Games forum

OT: What does Obama's second term mean for gun owners?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 151-175 of 334 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:11:13 AM PST
AKs do not run .223...they run 7.62 x 39mm or 5.45 x 39mm. Some AK variants nowadays will run .223, but that is not the status quo. .223 is also widely used (outside the AR platform) as a hunting round.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:11:57 AM PST
They are confusing assault rifle with the "assault weapon" classification that was created by the ban originally.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:13:04 AM PST
FOGE says:
Ok. So... i had to check since the US Govt has banned my definition under the "Assault Rifle ban"

You are right but thats not the full definition.

It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock);
It must be capable of selective fire;
It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle;
Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)

*wikipedia.

The only thing an AR-15 is lacking is the selective fire. Otherwise its an assault rifle. Guess its a grey area.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:14:05 AM PST
User says:
That's a big thing to be missing though.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:15:05 AM PST
Bobbum Man says:
I disagree with the killing of defenseless animals is all. I understand it's to thin the herd...it's just every hunter I've met I've hated because they try to act all macho about killing something that just stands there eating grass and whatnot. So I'm biased. Now, a lion that's a good hunt. Never know who's the predator and who's the prey.

When these "rights" were bestowed to American citizens there was no way they'd know we'd cook up these kinds of weapons. I strongly believe the government should deny every single civilian the right to own an assault rifle. If they want a musket though that's cool.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:15:38 AM PST
FOGE says:
I honestly dont see that as a big deal. I can fire semi auto much more accurately and if I want to nearly as fast. Its still an incredibly deadly weapon.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:15:42 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Nov 8, 2012 10:16:33 AM PST]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:16:02 AM PST
That's not true. I get what you are trying to say though. per the original AWB and what is still commonly reffered to as "assault Weapons" they are a semi automatic rifle with high cap mags. that has a rail and may or may not have a folding stock. as somebody else reffered to them as black rifles

It is legal (now) for most civilians to own an "assault rifle" it is not legal for most civilians to own a machine gun (fully automatic rifle) depending on state and licensing.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:17:14 AM PST
teehee

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:17:48 AM PST
so how is that any more powerful than or dangerous than say my ruger 10-22 that is also semi auto, but would not be banned under an assault weapons ban? are they worried people are going to affix a bayonet to their rifle and run around stabbin people?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:18:54 AM PST
FOGE says:
Ok, I can understand that. And Ill admit there isnt a fair game involved in hunting most animals. Though it does take some talent to track or stalk an animal. Im not a hunter. I think its fine if people want to do it. We got to eat so... whats wrong with letting some food live a free life as opposed to be farm grown commercially.

Well, they had to understand that weapons would evolve. Firearms had been evolving for hundreds of years. The idea is to keep the govt in check and balance the power. They honestly had no idea the miliary would create things like the JDAM laser guided bomb or A-10 Thunderbolt. I think its ok for civilians to keep small arms. Hell, the govt still has quite the edge.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:19:40 AM PST
No, no, no. An "assault rifle", by definition, is a select-fire weapon. One can only own an "assault rifle" if done so in compliance with the National Firearms Act.

An "assault weapon" like a civilian version AR-15, is not the same thing, by definition.

This distinction is very important.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:20:21 AM PST
I only read two, fight club and invisible monsters.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:20:25 AM PST
FOGE says:
Ah, ok, I learned something today.

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 10:20:30 AM PST
MrFoxhound says:
"Though it does take some talent to track or stalk an animal."

Sitting in a tree stand for 8 hours getting wasted and eating Slim Jims while waiting for a deer to walk under you when you aim a high powered rifle that can shoot a mile away at it from 30 feet away?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:22:07 AM PST
FOGE says:
Most rifles wont shoot straight for a mile. There is bullet drop at that range. There could also be wind. And deer are easily spooked. Its not easy to sit quietly and wait. I can hardly sit through 90 mins of a movie, let alone 8 hours silently and not move.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:22:29 AM PST
An assault rifle is an assault weapon. A semi-automatic rifle is an assault weapon. A semi-automatic rifle is not an assault rifle.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:23:13 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 8, 2012 10:23:46 AM PST
Extremely important, and most of the time misunderstood by the majority of people in society.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:24:08 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 8, 2012 10:25:09 AM PST
If your ruger 10/22 falls into any one of those categories (like, say, if you threw an Archangel stock on it with a pistol grip) it would have been classified as an assault weapon based on the previous ban. However, the ban was only in reference to the manufacture for civilian use, not the ownership of, said firearms. It also only applied to weapons manufactured post-ban, hence the old "pre-ban" designation put on many firearms. You could sell a pre-ban firearm that fit the classification of an assault weapon all you wanted.

You could make it yourself, a company simply could not manufacture and sell them.

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 10:25:34 AM PST
McAwesomeo says:
"What does Obama's second term mean for authors of sensationalist articles?"

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:25:44 AM PST
Either way, it can pierce soft armor.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:26:11 AM PST
MrFoxhound says:
Job security.

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 10:26:57 AM PST
Bobbum Man says:
That's a good point, I suppose it's better to let them roam free as opposed to living in a cage of some sort. Hunter's I've met didn't seem to care about the food though and some wouldn't even skin or harvest meat or whatever they do, they just mount a head on a wall as a trophy. It was more about the "sit in the woods with your buddies drinking beer and wait for Bambi" kind of attitude which really turned me off to hunting.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:27:19 AM PST
So can a 375 H&H Magnum, but that's bolt action so I guess it doesn't count as much.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 10:27:36 AM PST
McAwesomeo says:
I was going to write a whole fake article, but I'm at work and don't have that kind of time. So I went with a headline.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Video Games forum
Participants:  40
Total posts:  334
Initial post:  Nov 8, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 9, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions