Which One Is The Assault Weapon?

Originally posted by geocom
reply to post by Montana

 

I think the point of the OP was to illustrate that the 2 rifles are exactly the same rifle just different furniture and accessories otherwise same weapon, that and people have this visual idea of an assault weapon and don't really know the difference and according to the assault rifle ban that expired in 2004 the lower rifle or the one that most people who didn't know better would consider an assault rifle would in fact be considered an assault rifle

Sigh....

Yes, I understand the point of the OP. However that point is false from the get-go. It DOESN"T MATTER what uninformed people might think LOOKS like an assault rifle. No one is getting arrested, fined, or imprisoned for that. What matters is what IS CLASSIFIED as an assault rifle that really shouldn't be. That is the discussion that needs to happen.

Threads like this just add fuzz to an issue that needs to be razor sharp.

Originally posted by PvtHudson

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
My definition of an assault weapon is:
High capacity mags and full auto or select fire and a short barrel and stock designed for fast target acquisition.
Although i believe the brainless mass of anti gun nuts would call the modified 10/22 an assault weapon.

You're completely wrong. An assault "weapon" does not have full auto fire at all.

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by JIMC5499

 

These are the guns that were used in Newton

The picture is wrong. The AR-15 was not full auto and thus, not an assault rifle.

edit on 19-12-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

Im wrong because its my personal view? who are you to tell my my personal views are wrong.

The ar-15 is the civy version of the M-16......that is the full auto and select fire model.

Puhhh Leasseee!

reply to post by JIMC5499

Both semi auto and of the same calibre but that second one with the "Folding Stock", "Pistol Grip" and "Flash Hider" has the accessories that make it look scarier.

Originally posted by geocom
reply to post by shaneslaughta

 

Agreed on the irresponsible people when I say I'm okay wi ten round mags I mean in general hobby or hunting use if I hate reloading a ten round mag as well but to me that a small sacrifice but hey we are all different

Also yeah on the moving target thing I'm 100% MISSED them all lol

Much harder to shoot at a moving target

yes and those moving target that are shooting back more than likely will have high cap mags.
So while your empty being shot at trying to reload and running for cover....the bad guy has a bead on your head.

people need to have a logical stand point on these things or at least not run off at the mouth about what they dont know or understand and vest no time in trying to understand.

reply to post by JIMC5499


To hear the MSM describe either weapon... You would hear both of them described as "automatic" rifles just as they have referred to a certain Bushmaster used in Connecticut... "Machine Guns" etc etc..

Time to get the facts straight within the MSM. Unfortunately they are to concerned with painting a very specific image in the minds of those Americans who honestly don't know the difference between a .22 and a .223.

Just DuraCoat the bottom 10/22 Pink and no one will see it as a threat....

ETA

Just for the record AR as in AR 15 does not stand for Assault Rifle. It has its origins as an abreviation for Armalite.

reply to post by shaneslaughta

A battlefield "Assault" rifle is either full auto or select fire (from single or semi-auto to 2 or 3 round burst to full auto) with a selector switch above the trigger. The civilian "Assault" styled weapons look like their military counterparts but are semi auto (one shot per pull of the trigger). Most in the military prefer the 2-3 round bursts as full auto wastes ammo and is harder to control. Generally full auto only makes sense for cover fire or when a defensive position is being overrun...otherwise it is wasteful.

A better comparison for the sake of the AWB would be:

Which is the "Assault Rifle"

This one

Or

This one

One is what is referred to as "pre-ban" or not compliant with the AWB.

The other is what is referred to as "post-ban" or compliant with the AWB. That one is what was used in Newtown.

The real problem though is that those who are ignorant as # about this type of thing do not want to learn anything.

Originally posted by Indigo5
The best definition would be the one used in the now expired Federal Assault Weapons ban..

These were all semi-automatic firearms, meaning that they can eject spent shell casings and chamber the next round without additional human action, but (as opposed to automatic firearms) only one round is fired per pull of the trigger. In addition to the 19 weapons specifically prohibited, the federal assault weapons ban also defined as a prohibited assault weapon any semiautomatic rifle with a detachable magazine and at least two of the following five items: a folding or telescopic stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel (a barrel that can accommodate a flash suppressor); or a grenade launcher. The act also defined as a prohibited assault weapon semi-automatic pistols that weighed more than 50 ounces when unloaded or included a barrel shroud, and barred the manufacture of magazines capable of carrying more than 10 rounds.

en.wikipedia.org...

This definition proves my point. Weapon "A" would be legal under the Assault Weapons Ban, but Weapon "B" would not be, due to the folding stock and flash suppressor. NEITHER OF WHICH EFFECT THE FIRING MECHANISM

reply to post by shaneslaughta


If you read that post I said for general hobby and hunting use I'm good with the 10 rd mags

I'm not putting myself in the position of needing to fire back at someone with a high cap mag
Ad for personal defense in the home I use a shotgun and a 1911 so yeah I'm good with 10 rd mags

If I were military or a police officer or something along those lines I could see it but the fact is I personally am okay with low cap mags just my personal stance that being said I'm all good with your high cap mags as well I have many of them myself but I don't need them

Originally posted by PvtHudson

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
My definition of an assault weapon is:
High capacity mags and full auto or select fire and a short barrel and stock designed for fast target acquisition.
Although i believe the brainless mass of anti gun nuts would call the modified 10/22 an assault weapon.

You're completely wrong. An assault "weapon" does not have full auto fire at all.

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by JIMC5499

 

These are the guns that were used in Newton

The picture is wrong. The AR-15 was not full auto and thus, not an assault rifle.

edit on 19-12-2012 by PvtHudson because: (no reason given)

You were right in your first comment....In the last Assualt Weapons ban Semi-Automatic plus high capacity magazines, pistol grip etc. were the qualifiers. It doesn't need to be fully automatic to qualify. The AR-15 that Lanza, the DC Shooters, Th Aurora Colorado 'Batman" shooter all used was "Semi-Automatic"...fires as quickly as you can pull the trigger.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Thank you, that is a much better comparison. And the answer is neither should be.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


I agree, the only time you need full auto is for suppressive actions and that job is usually left to the heavier belt fed guns.

full auto on an m16 with a twenty or thirty round mag is wasteful and with the muzzle climb you may get only a few of those rounds to hit on target.

The ar-15 is assault styled but its by no means an actual assault weapon.
In my eyes the only reason police use them is because they are more accurate as a single shot.
it lowers the chance of wounding innocents.

reply to post by jibeho

Yes and they often refer to handguns as "automatic" also. They mean, of course, "auto loading" not "fully automatic" but to do so only adds to the confusion.

reply to post by geocom


I wasn't personally attacking you, i was just stating that its my opinion that higher cap mags can be life savers, i guess it also depends on the theater of operation too. wide open long range i would prefer single shot and lower cap.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


Current issue weapons A4 don't even have a full auto option any longer. Safe/Semi/Burst options. Most skilled Riflemen just leave it in Semi Mode...

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
reply to post by geocom

 

I wasn't personally attacking you, i was just stating that its my opinion that higher cap mags can be life savers, i guess it also depends on the theater of operation too.

The obvious...the other side of that is that the higher capacity mags also allow for a higher death toll.

Why did these shooters choose the AR-15?

Adam Lanza used an AR-15 last Friday at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Last week, a man used one to kill two people at a shopping mall in Portland, Ore. And in July, an AR-15 was used in the movie theater massacre in Aurora, Colo., in which 12 people were killed and 58 injured.

Plus the DC shooters..

If we had warfare in the streets and there were regular instances of folks defending themselves successfully with the utility of high capacity magazines via the AR-15...then a case for thier neccessity would be more easily made.

reply to post by Indigo5


Could simply be that it is the single most popular rifle in the United States.

The AR to the US is like the AK to everywhere else.

Which one is the assault weapon??

well, I ask you this: Which one is the assault weapon according to those that hold the power really??

seongyosa.files.wordpress.com...


static.icivics.org...

which is more 'dangerous' to those who assume they are the ones that TRULY matter?

While we are being distracted by the most primitive of 'weapons' before we even invented a weapon called LANGUAGE, they are using LANGUAGE to disarm our basic need to be able to protect and feed ourselves. Clever indeed. This is the only way to lead a horse to water--and not allow him to drink.

reply to post by Indigo5


My guess would e because it was there and may she rest in peace his mother evidently was a bit irresponsible with locking them up I know father wouldn't have even had them in the house if one of the the three kids had had some issues with stability the is a right and wrong way to store weapons and I think his mother missed the mark

reply to post by shaneslaughta


I didn't feel like you were brother, I just was stating my opinion cause your reply made me think I left it a bit incomplete

Cheers