SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Second Amendment Under Attack In Congress

Page 5 of 7

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Second Amendment Under Attack In Congress (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=183757)

gimpy117

05-19-11 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1666911)

So my bolt-action five-shot Ought-Three Springfield is an assault rifle? It was considered one in 1917, but today is clearly outside the legal definitions of that category. Should it be included? I've had it since 1987, and I have yet to shoot anybody with it. Or even any deer, for that matter.

Its a rifle. it's a full length cartage. it was considered a rifle back then too. Sailor, you know as well as i do that a 1903 Springfield isn't An AK-47, If anything its closer to any 5 shot bolt action hunting rifle you can but at almost any gum shop in the US.

although i would like to own one. I say a 30-40 Kraig carbine in a pawn shop that I wish i could justify spending $400 on the other day. Alas, college is pricey

Platapus

05-19-11 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 1666950)

Nine's are nice but I like stuff that can shoot through schools:doh:

"They made it for him special. It's an eighty-eight Magnum"

"It shoots through schools"

Awesome movie!

Dames are put on this earth to weaken us, drain our energy, laugh at us when they see us naked. :D

August

05-19-11 07:43 PM

His mother hung him on a hook once..... Once!

Platapus

05-19-11 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 1666811)

First off the term assult rifle was made up to demonies weapons. Assult means attack, so if it sits in the corner, I guess it is a peace rifle.

Unfortunately, in the US, the legal definition, in the context of gun control laws, of an "Assault Rifle" is very different from the actual definition of an Assault Rifle.

An assault rifle sounds so much more scary than the more accurate "semi-automatic commercially available, civilian model rifle made to resemble in appearance an assault rifle, but is incapable of operating as an actual assault rifle"

You just can't scare the house fraus with that. :nope:

Freiwillige

05-19-11 07:57 PM

The term Assault rifle comes directly from Hitler's mouth. The first ever Assault rifle known by Hitler as the SturmGewehr 44

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44

From wikipedia
"Developed from the Mkb 42(H) "machine carbine", the StG44 combined the characteristics of a carbine, submachine gun and automatic rifle. StG is an abbreviation of Sturmgewehr. The name was chosen for propaganda reasons and literally means "storm rifle" as in "to storm an enemy position" (i.e. "assault", leading to the modern terminology "assault rifle"). After the adoption of the StG 44, the English translation "assault rifle" became the accepted designation for this type of infantry small arm."

My AK is missing the Automatic rifle portion hence the (NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE) label.

Freiwillige

05-19-11 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117 (Post 1666863)

but with much less powder behind it. do you have any clue how bullets work? A .308 the .30-06 cartage has a much higher powder charge making it more powerful. lust because it has the same caliber does not mean it's just as effective for hunting. Also, a 5.45x39 is not anywhere the same as a .22 either. Much higher powder to bullet ratio.

I also reject the idea that cartage has nothing to do with the making of an assault rifle. why? because an assault rifle cartage is the basis of the gun itself. A full sized .308 firing full auto would be known as a automatic rifle, Like the BAR or FG-42. However, the idea of an assault rifle is an automatic rifle firing an intermediate cartage between a pistol and a full on rifle. If your gun fired 9mm I'd call it an SMG, If your Gun fired 7.62x54r then I'll call it a Dragunov or SVD which is a Rifle.

If my gun fired a 9mm you would call it a SMG. How is that possible since a SMG, Sub Machine Gun has to be fully Automatic AKA Machine gun?

So the Ruger 14 ranch rifle is an assault rifle since it fire's .223\5.56?

Platapus

05-19-11 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freiwillige (Post 1667011)

My AK is missing the Automatic rifle portion hence the (NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE) label.

But in the context of gun control laws, it may, depending on the state, be considered an "assault rifle".

Does not make it right, logical, historically correct, or even common sense, but it establish legal status.

Personally, I am all in favour of restricting civilians from owning Assault Rifles, but not restricting stuff that may kinda look like an assault rifle. :nope:

yubba

05-19-11 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus (Post 1666993)

Only shot it once.:haha: ok, contenietal United States, they still got the boot. ggggeeeeeeezzzzz nice to know somebody knows their history, but I still nailed it:O: At least the British got to go back to England, get it ???????

Sailor Steve

05-19-11 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117 (Post 1666970)

I know it's a rifle. I thought you were talking about the cartridge making the "assault" part. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Sailor Steve

05-19-11 09:53 PM

Quote:

@Steve It is always funny...

But I only mentioned one. Of course he happens to be the one behind the creation of our Constitution, and he happens to be the one behind the Amendments to same, so his opinion does count for something.

gimpy117

05-19-11 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1667052)

I know it's a rifle. I thought you were talking about the cartridge making the "assault" part. Sorry if I misunderstood.

it's more of a combination of the two in my opinion

Wolfehunter

05-20-11 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MH (Post 1666786)

Some of those laws seem to me a bit ancient though and cause more harm than good.

Why do you believe freedom to own weapons causes more harm than good?

MH	05-20-11 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfehunter (Post 1667170)

Why do you believe freedom to own weapons causes more harm than good?

As i said before in may view it raises the barrier of violence.
In a society where every one in potential firearm owner gun is a must have tool for simplest criminal.
I don't read the statistics but i'm quite sure that even if USA has lower certain crime rate(i doubt that)than other countries overall the crimes are more violet and end up with more dead people.
Every potential robbery is potential gun fight.

Tribesman

05-20-11 07:46 AM

Quote:

ok, contenietal United States, they still got the boot. ggggeeeeeeezzzzz nice to know somebody knows their history, but I still nailed it

No yubba you didn't nail it, in fact you were so far off nailing it that you forgot to have either a hammer or a nail.

Quote:

But I only mentioned one.

@Steve,....but that exchange originated from a comment by someone who didn't.

yubba

05-20-11 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1667197)

No yubba you didn't nail it, in fact you were so far off nailing it that you forgot to have either a hammer or a nail.

@Steve,....but that exchange originated from a comment by someone who didn't.

Ok then, you explain what the founding fathers meant when, they added the second amendment, and what not to be infringed upon means.:doh:

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 PM.

Page 5 of 7

Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page