Wisconsin Senate passes bill to scrap 48-hour wait period for handgun purchases

a reply to: Vasa Croe

In Michigan, you can walk in, pay, they run your license by phone....in 15 mins you can walk out with your gun.

You then have 5 business days to take the purchase/registration slip to your local State, city or county police station clerks office to register it as yours.

No need either to take/present the gun itself.

There is no fee to register with police and clerk.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Vasa Croe

In Michigan, you can walk in, pay, they run your license by phone....in 15 mins you can walk out with your gun.

You then have 5 business days to take the purchase/registration slip to your local State, city or county police station clerks office to register it as yours.

No need either to take/present the gun itself.

There is no fee to register with police and clerk.

Yeah, it is pretty simple in GA as well. Filling out the application for the gun then filing it. If you have a license it is even easier.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

Come again? Point to anywhere in this statement I said automatic again? I said round fired in succession, which you can't do with a bolt action, you have to engage the bolt each round. Semi-auto you can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

So your idiot comment is noted but completely disregarded. My comment was based on the fact is does not matter what weapon a .223 is fired from, the round and it's load are what give it the ability to "move". The rifle is simple the means for it to be fired. AR-15's have the ability to fire in rapid succession.

And to educate you further, no, automatic weapons are NOT illegal for the public to own. It simply takes a different type of authorization for the public to get one. I should know. I have had and still do have both full auto weapons and suppressors over the years.

Maybe educate yourself a bit more before spewing ignorance.

I consider myself very pro-2nd, but to be honest, a 2 day waiting period doesn't give me a lot of heartburn. Give the Gov a chance to make sure the person isn't a prison escapee, etc. Also give the buyer a chance to "cool off" if need be. If you're getting a gun for self or home protection, hopefully two days won't kill you. My opinion, you should already have one or two anyway.

On the other hand, as Augustus pointed out, give the Gov an inch and they will take a mile.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

Come again? Point to anywhere in this statement I said automatic again? I said round fired in succession, which you can't do with a bolt action, you have to engage the bolt each round. Semi-auto you can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

So your idiot comment is noted but completely disregarded. My comment was based on the fact is does not matter what weapon a .223 is fired from, the round and it's load are what give it the ability to "move". The rifle is simple the means for it to be fired. AR-15's have the ability to fire in rapid succession.

And to educate you further, no, automatic weapons are NOT illegal for the public to own. It simply takes a different type of authorization for the public to get one. I should know. I have had and still do have both full auto weapons and suppressors over the years.

Maybe educate yourself a bit more before spewing ignorance.

"It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle." In this statement you are implying that assault rifles fire faster than any other rifle (not withstanding bolt action). How does an assault rifle fire faster than a handgun? Please elaborate. How does an "assault rifle" fire faster than say a regular semi-auto rifle. Are we to take that you also have a problem with semi-auto handguns and revolvers? Are you advocating banning of all guns except bolt-action rifles or shotguns? Please clarify your position.

I didn't say totally illegal, I said for the "most part illegal" meaning your average Jethro cannot walk into a Wal-Mart or Cabela's and purchase a full auto. Just because some licensed dealers or other qualified individuals can purchase these rifles does not mean they are available to the general public.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

Come again? Point to anywhere in this statement I said automatic again? I said round fired in succession, which you can't do with a bolt action, you have to engage the bolt each round. Semi-auto you can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

So your idiot comment is noted but completely disregarded. My comment was based on the fact is does not matter what weapon a .223 is fired from, the round and it's load are what give it the ability to "move". The rifle is simple the means for it to be fired. AR-15's have the ability to fire in rapid succession.

And to educate you further, no, automatic weapons are NOT illegal for the public to own. It simply takes a different type of authorization for the public to get one. I should know. I have had and still do have both full auto weapons and suppressors over the years.

Maybe educate yourself a bit more before spewing ignorance.

"It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle." In this statement you are implying that assault rifles fire faster than any other rifle (not withstanding bolt action). How does an assault rifle fire faster than a handgun? Please elaborate. How does an "assault rifle" fire faster than say a regular semi-auto rifle. Are we to take that you also have a problem with semi-auto handguns and revolvers? Are you advocating banning of all guns except bolt-action rifles or shotguns? Please clarify your position.

I didn't say totally illegal, I said for the "most part illegal" meaning your average Jethro cannot walk into a Wal-Mart or Cabela's and purchase a full auto. Just because some licensed dealers or other qualified individuals can purchase these rifles does not mean they are available to the general public.

Did you even read the OP? Where, in ANY of my posts on guns in this entire forums, are you getting the idea I am advocating banning anything at all?

And if you bothered to read the entire thread, the question was asked about the round being fired. so I simply pointed out that there was a difference based on the number of rounds able to be fired, FROM A RIFLE, between what is considered and "assault" rifle versus a bolt action. And I am correct....you can fire many rounds in rapid succession with an "assault" rifle or AR-15 and you CAN'T with a bolt action.

It is also incorrect for you to say it is illegal, in any means, for someone to own and automatic weapon. It isn't. Sure you can't walk into a store and buy one, but if you go about the legal way of obtaining one you can....nothing illegal about it....just hard to get.

Please read the entire thread before replying again....I really hate having to go back to re-quote things I already stated.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

Why do they deserve more protection than the common man?

Or at least why do they think they do?

I don't get it.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

Any rifle can be an assault rifle. Not arguing your point. Their thinking just amazes me that an AR 15 is deemed so dangerous, when my 30-06 is far more powerful but because it doesn't LOOK all futuristic with all that aftermarket crap its perfectly OK.

Exactly. Focusing on military style weapons first so as not to piss off the whole of gun owners all at once.

After they make military "style" weapons illegal, then they focus on hi velocity bullets. Again carefully avoiding main stream American gun owners.

They constantly remind citizens they are not after your guns but really, they are.

I believe this is the exact model they are using, death by a thousand paper cuts.

Until we wontvbe able to use sling shots, while they get to have lazer guns etc.

They don't like equal footing, because they are such a vast minority.

I don't think a 24 hour waiting period is a bad idea. That would keep most people who are upset from buying a gun and shooting someone. It gives a person some time to sleep on it and to not do something that they will later regret.

Just buy a handgun before you need it. Be prepared. Why wait till the last minute.

I should get a gift certificate from the gun companies for this post.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

Come again? Point to anywhere in this statement I said automatic again? I said round fired in succession, which you can't do with a bolt action, you have to engage the bolt each round. Semi-auto you can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

So your idiot comment is noted but completely disregarded. My comment was based on the fact is does not matter what weapon a .223 is fired from, the round and it's load are what give it the ability to "move". The rifle is simple the means for it to be fired. AR-15's have the ability to fire in rapid succession.

And to educate you further, no, automatic weapons are NOT illegal for the public to own. It simply takes a different type of authorization for the public to get one. I should know. I have had and still do have both full auto weapons and suppressors over the years.

Maybe educate yourself a bit more before spewing ignorance.

"It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle." In this statement you are implying that assault rifles fire faster than any other rifle (not withstanding bolt action). How does an assault rifle fire faster than a handgun? Please elaborate. How does an "assault rifle" fire faster than say a regular semi-auto rifle. Are we to take that you also have a problem with semi-auto handguns and revolvers? Are you advocating banning of all guns except bolt-action rifles or shotguns? Please clarify your position.

I didn't say totally illegal, I said for the "most part illegal" meaning your average Jethro cannot walk into a Wal-Mart or Cabela's and purchase a full auto. Just because some licensed dealers or other qualified individuals can purchase these rifles does not mean they are available to the general public.

Did you even read the OP? Where, in ANY of my posts on guns in this entire forums, are you getting the idea I am advocating banning anything at all?

And if you bothered to read the entire thread, the question was asked about the round being fired. so I simply pointed out that there was a difference based on the number of rounds able to be fired, FROM A RIFLE, between what is considered and "assault" rifle versus a bolt action. And I am correct....you can fire many rounds in rapid succession with an "assault" rifle or AR-15 and you CAN'T with a bolt action.

It is also incorrect for you to say it is illegal, in any means, for someone to own and automatic weapon. It isn't. Sure you can't walk into a store and buy one, but if you go about the legal way of obtaining one you can....nothing illegal about it....just hard to get.

Please read the entire thread before replying again....I really hate having to go back to re-quote things I already stated.

I apologize and after re-reading I misinterpreted the context of your statement. I live in the most gun-grabbiest city (we were the tiny town that went all the way to the Supreme Court a couple of years ago and thankfully lost). I had to argue with a lot of the gun grabbing loons here who would constantly write articles in our newspaper about assault weapons and how they shoot faster, etc. This is what happens when you post quickly while at work...

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

Based on this comment, you are obviously unqualified to have an opinion on this subject. But what is so amazing to me is that you state it like you actually know WTF you are talking about when it is obvious to anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of firearms you really have no clue.

Automatic weapons have been for the most part illegal for the public to own since 1934. Automatic weapons are those that fire rounds AUTOMATICALLY so you just pull the trigger and bullets spit out. These are true military grade weapons like the m-16, etc.

The rifles and handguns today, even the hated AR-15 are SEMI-AUTO which means they fire only as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no "assault weapon" available to the public that fires faster than any other handgun. The AR-15 is to military rifles like a Porsche is to a actual race car. They may look similar, but are worlds apart.

Then you have bolt action rifles which after each shot, the user has to reload a bullet with the bolt.

This is why there can't be an honest debate about this topic with gun grabbers because they have no understanding of guns, facts, and logic. It is all emotion with these folks.

Come again? Point to anywhere in this statement I said automatic again? I said round fired in succession, which you can't do with a bolt action, you have to engage the bolt each round. Semi-auto you can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger.

So your idiot comment is noted but completely disregarded. My comment was based on the fact is does not matter what weapon a .223 is fired from, the round and it's load are what give it the ability to "move". The rifle is simple the means for it to be fired. AR-15's have the ability to fire in rapid succession.

And to educate you further, no, automatic weapons are NOT illegal for the public to own. It simply takes a different type of authorization for the public to get one. I should know. I have had and still do have both full auto weapons and suppressors over the years.

Maybe educate yourself a bit more before spewing ignorance.

"It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle." In this statement you are implying that assault rifles fire faster than any other rifle (not withstanding bolt action). How does an assault rifle fire faster than a handgun? Please elaborate. How does an "assault rifle" fire faster than say a regular semi-auto rifle. Are we to take that you also have a problem with semi-auto handguns and revolvers? Are you advocating banning of all guns except bolt-action rifles or shotguns? Please clarify your position.

I didn't say totally illegal, I said for the "most part illegal" meaning your average Jethro cannot walk into a Wal-Mart or Cabela's and purchase a full auto. Just because some licensed dealers or other qualified individuals can purchase these rifles does not mean they are available to the general public.

Did you even read the OP? Where, in ANY of my posts on guns in this entire forums, are you getting the idea I am advocating banning anything at all?

And if you bothered to read the entire thread, the question was asked about the round being fired. so I simply pointed out that there was a difference based on the number of rounds able to be fired, FROM A RIFLE, between what is considered and "assault" rifle versus a bolt action. And I am correct....you can fire many rounds in rapid succession with an "assault" rifle or AR-15 and you CAN'T with a bolt action.

It is also incorrect for you to say it is illegal, in any means, for someone to own and automatic weapon. It isn't. Sure you can't walk into a store and buy one, but if you go about the legal way of obtaining one you can....nothing illegal about it....just hard to get.

Please read the entire thread before replying again....I really hate having to go back to re-quote things I already stated.

I apologize and after re-reading I misinterpreted the context of your statement. I live in the most gun-grabbiest city (we were the tiny town that went all the way to the Supreme Court a couple of years ago and thankfully lost). I had to argue with a lot of the gun grabbing loons here who would constantly write articles in our newspaper about assault weapons and how they shoot faster, etc. This is what happens when you post quickly while at work...

No worries....thanks for the apology. I have been posting a lot of great gun news lately and am very pro 2nd amendment. I argue with a lot of gun grabbers as well....both online and in the real world. Luckily for us, we actually have the law on our side...all they can do is complain.

I know it may fall on deaf ears for some but the term "Assault Rifle" is very farcical. I really feel like people see AR anything and immediately associate it with the scary assault rifle moniker. AR in AR-15 or AR-10 or AR-22 stands for Armalite Rifle. which is the company that first made them, however many companies now have license to manufacture and modify the design so I cans see how it gets lost. To me it makes no difference the size of the bullet or the amount of rounds it can fire. Here in the good ol' US of A this is all completely legal and fine. In fact it's our right to have and own. I'm a whole lot less afraid of crime or my fellow citizens than I am of those in power right now.

Assuming they can refuse a sale to someone who's feeling rather annoyed such as they've just found out their wifes ran off with another man/drunk etc as they're not in a safe state of mind i'd say its fine for a sale to happen as probably what would it take for the same person other than a load of fuel and a while to drive to another state and pick one up anyway?

They should just cut to the end of the narrative and issue a gun at birth...

or, better yet, send them back through time to retroactively give all U.S. citizens guns in the past... hmmm... maybe they already did?

Pew pew...

Does it say anywhere in the constitution that background checks must be performed?

Yes it says well regulated militia, will that cover it?

If so then all they have to do is show a militia Id card no?

Can also somebody point out in the constitution where it states only specific types of weapons or certain kinds of ammo may be held as a right?

Also as a corollary to this, does it state anywhere in the constitution where body armour is restricted?

a reply to: johnwick

They don't like equal footing, because they are such a vast minority.

Total Control Freaks know that eventually to have total control they must remove all ability to fight back, you got it.

Thats how certain weapons in the Far East were born. Nunchaku were rice threshing devices…

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because you can conceal a handgun on your person. A long barrel rifle, not so much.

The focus is "assault rifles" (able to penetrate body armor) and "handguns" (can be hidden until close) to protect LEOs and Politicians.

How does an "assault rifle"(basically a type of design) make it so that any(apparently) bullet(caliber) has the necessary ballistics and physical composition to penetrate body armor?

If I fire a 223 through a "assault rifle" it will penetrate body armor but if I fire it through a bolt action hunting rifle it will not?

I'm not too familiar with these types of things so I'd love a bit of help, if you could.

Doesn't make a difference what it is fired from. And it also depends on the body armor as far as what rounds it can take a hit from. It is more about how many rounds can be fired in succession from an "assault" rifle.

I just cannot believe this had to be explained to someone... literally shaking my head.