Jump to content

Fallout: Massacre @ Cinema 9


Recommended Posts

 

 

Projection FAIL!!

 

Strange that you would bring up it's color? Projection rears it's ugly head again. Notice I didn't say anything about color in any of my posts but you still go back to that. My thinking is that it was designed as a full automatic and then dialed down, not that it has cool plastic and aluminum parts that are powder coated black. I own an AR-10 model, which you do know is the .308 predecessor to the M-16.

 

And you can buy AR-15's in multiple colors including green.

You can cry semantics all you want, but these terms are old as dirt. Assault rifle designates a medium range automatic rifle with a stock. An FAL, for instance, is commonly mistaken for an assault rifle. It's actually refered to as a battle rifle. An M4 is often mistaken for an assault rifle. It's actually a carbine.

 

The least you can do is learn the difference to make a coherent argument. Otherwise, you are just causing confusion.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AR-15s and similar type guns are known collectively as "black guns" because originally, that was only color available.

 

The relationship to the automatic mitary version is not relevant. In all aspects of its operation, it's a single shot semi automatic rifle.

 

The simple fact is that he made an innuendo that I had an issue with assault weapons because of color, which in and of itself was stupid. I was merely pointing out that not all assault weapons are entirely black, not giving a history lesson on military weapons. I own and have owned assault rifles along with using them in the military.

 

I really am not for or against them. I don't see banning them as infringing on the right to bear arms, nor do i see a significant reason to ban them. The majority of people I know that own them or any pseudo-military styles weapon are not hunters so my ancedotal beliefe is that your not interfering with the nature of bearing arms.

 

Now if you see that amendment as to allow the citizen to arm himself in direct rebellion against the government then I can see where your coming from but the court has already ruled against you having weapons capable of competing with the military so I think that theory is rendered moot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they had the number of mass killings we have had just this year, I think they might have limited those weapons to military use only.

 

It wouldn't have been any more enforceable at that time than it is today (especially considering that there was no real standing army at that time - certainly nothing like we have today). Virtually everyone agrees that the federal ban on "assault weapons" did nothing to reduce crime.

Edited by grbeck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can cry semantics all you want, but these terms are old as dirt. Assault rifle designates a medium range automatic rifle with a stock. An FAL, for instance, is commonly mistaken for an assault rifle. It's actually refered to as a battle rifle.

 

So, I guess we should ban battle rifles too. Although i would hate for that to happen as it's my favorite military rifle. I owned a L1A1 British version of it and am thinking of getting another FAL somebody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...