People Coming To FL ‘Overwhelmingly’ Registering As Republicans; Democrats Switc

[Spider-Dan]

In point of fact, "banning semi-automatic guns" would not be "banning all guns."

[Tenshot13]

"Tell me what makes this particular weapon more dangerous" - ask the people who wrote the laws!  I'm not an expert on firearms (and neither are you).

Pondwater seems like an expert on firearms to me.

[Tenshot13]

In point of fact, "banning semi-automatic guns" would not be "banning all guns."

That bans everything but bolt action rifles and a handful of a particular kind of revolver.

[pondwater]

If we're trying to have a discussion about whether drunk driving is a problem, it's a distraction to fixate on "Why is it .08% BAC instead of .07% or .10%?  Tell me what makes .08% BAC dangerous but .07% BAC perfectly fine."   Especially if you don't think there should be ANY laws restricting drinking and driving at all!

I don't hear you calling to ban alcohol, and it kills many times more people a year than assault weapons. It's against the law to drink and drive. It's against the law to shoot people. Now tell me what percentage of people killed in shootings are killed with assault weapons. Then tell me with a straight face that assault weapons are a problem, LMFAO.

It's all a smokescreen.

That's right, it's all a liberal smokescreen. Because in the drunk driving scenario you would be trying to ban just vodka when any other alcoholic drink will get you just as drunk and result in a DUI and/or death.

[pondwater]

And here we are, back in the terminology vortex.

"Assault rifle is a made up term"... that was already on the books as enforced federal legislation for 10 years.
"Tell me what makes this particular weapon more dangerous" - ask the people who wrote the laws!  I'm not an expert on firearms (and neither are you).

I never claimed to be an expert. But when it comes to knowledge of firearms between you and me. You're in the 3rd grade and I'm in college.

Unfortunately, those idiot politicians who wrote those laws aren't here and wouldn't win that argument. However, you provided a definition of "assault weapon". Using the definition you provided. Do YOU want firearms that fit that definition banned?

[pondwater]

In point of fact, "banning semi-automatic guns" would not be "banning all guns."

So wait, now you want to ban all semi-automatic firearms, not just what you call "assault weapons"?

[Spider-Dan]

I don't hear you calling to ban alcohol, and it kills many times more people a year than assault weapons.

First off: we tried it and it didn't work.
Second, alcohol - like knives, or cars, or dogs - serve a purpose other than inflicting injury.  When someone dies in a drunk driving collision, it's an unfortunate accident; when children are gunned down at a school, it's the product functioning as intended.  Guns are designed and intended to dispense injury and death: it is their explicit function and purpose.

So wait, now you want to ban all semi-automatic firearms, not just what you call "assault weapons"?

You insist that I want to "ban all guns," but even if I did want to ban all semi-automatic weapons, that would not be advocating to "ban all guns."  Q.E.D.

[Spider-Dan]

Unfortunately, those idiot politicians who wrote those laws aren't here and wouldn't win that argument. However, you provided a definition of "assault weapon". Using the definition you provided. Do YOU want firearms that fit that definition banned?

If you're asking if I support a reinstatement of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, the answer is an emphatic yes.

[pondwater]

First off: we tried it and it didn't work.
Second, alcohol - like knives, or cars, or dogs - serve a purpose other than inflicting injury.  When someone dies in a drunk driving collision, it's an unfortunate accident; when children are gunned down at a school, it's the product functioning as intended.

So you're saying that civilian market firearms are specifically "intended" to gun down children? Because I know for a fact that alcohol is specifically intended to impair people's judgement and motor functions. Is alcohol "functioning as intended" by causing injury, death, and wrecking people's lives?

 Guns are designed and intended to dispense injury and death: it is their explicit function and purpose.

Since dispensing injury and death are illegal, it seems like a bad business model. About 390 million guns in the country and about 15,000 firearm related homicides per year. Let's see 15000 ÷ 390,000,000 = can't believe they're still in business. The fact is that most civilian firearms are rarely used except for hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Now if you want to ban weapons that kill the most people, ban military weapons. Otherwise stop with the propaganda and scare tactics.

[pondwater]

If you're asking if I support a reinstatement of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, the answer is an emphatic yes.

So since you provided a definition of "assault weapon". And you support a so called assault weapon ban that was ineffective. I shouldn't have to "ask the people who wrote the laws", you should be able to intelligently tell me how the following cosmetic features make a firearm more deadly. 

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one

Don't even bother trying to explain bayonet mount & grenade launcher since I think they were added as a joke or something. I'm 99.9999999999999999% sure that we don't have a problem with people killing each other with bayonets and grenade launchers. As noted earlier, grenade launchers are already restricted NFA items, so why are they included in an "assault weapons" ban anyhow?

[Spider-Dan]

Pondwater seems like an expert on firearms to me.

Try asking him why the military issues fully automatic rifles.

That bans everything but bolt action rifles and a handful of a particular kind of revolver.

There are non-semi-automatic pump-action shotguns that would be unaffected by such a ban.

[Spider-Dan]

So you're saying that civilian market firearms are specifically "intended" to gun down children?

They are specifically intended to injure living beings.  Children are living beings, so the guns are working as intended.

Because I know for a fact that alcohol is specifically intended to impair people's judgement and motor functions.

First off, alcohol is a naturally-occurring chemical that isn't "intended" for anything.
Alcoholic beverages are NOT produced specifically to impair judgement and motor functions, and describing the purpose and intent of drinking alcohol as "to impair judgement and motor function" says a lot more about your drinking habits than anything else.

Since dispensing injury and death are illegal, it seems like a bad business model.

Not sure why you would say dispensing injury and death is "illegal"; any conservative can tell you that it's literally the point of the 2nd Amendment.  The 2nd Amendment fever dream is of a Good Guy With A Gun dispensing injury and death to The Evildoers, and it's incredibly legal.  Stand Your Ground!

The fact is that most civilian firearms are rarely used except for hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Now if you want to ban weapons that kill the most people, ban military weapons. Otherwise stop with the propaganda and scare tactics.

Hate to break this to you, but "hunting" is dispensing injury or death (i.e. the purpose of a gun).
I know you don't believe the 2nd Amendment was created to protect our right to participate in target shooting and/or collecting, so you probably shouldn't pretend like that is the intended purpose of a gun.  They are weapons of death, by design.  At least have the honesty to own it.

And you support a so called assault weapon ban that was ineffective.

"Ineffective"?  Says you.
You don't even dispute that firearm crime was reduced during the time the ban was in effect; you just refuse to acknowledge that it was related.

[pondwater]

Try asking him why the military issues fully automatic rifles.

What exactly would you like to know?

[pondwater]

They are specifically intended to injure living beings.  Children are living beings, so the guns are working as intended.

You're conflating shooting animals with shooting children? Not even close to the same thing.

First off, alcohol is a naturally-occurring chemical that isn't "intended" for anything.
Alcoholic beverages are NOT produced specifically to impair judgement and motor functions, and describing the purpose and intent of drinking alcohol as "to impair judgement and motor function" says a lot more about your drinking habits than anything else.

Alcohol is a toxic poison and depressant drug that is packaged and marketed to specifically intoxicate a person. When people die from alcohol consumption or alcohol related accidents, it's alcohol working as it was produced and marketed for. That's not even up for debate.
 

Not sure why you would say dispensing injury and death is "illegal"; any conservative can tell you that it's literally the point of the 2nd Amendment.  The 2nd Amendment fever dream is of a Good Guy With A Gun dispensing injury and death to The Evildoers, and it's incredibly legal.  Stand Your Ground!

You're conflating self defense with murder. They are two different things

Hate to break this to you, but "hunting" is dispensing injury or death (i.e. the purpose of a gun).

You're conflating hunting with murder. They are two different things

I know you don't believe the 2nd Amendment was created to protect our right to participate in target shooting and/or collecting, so you probably shouldn't pretend like that is the intended purpose of a gun.  They are weapons of death, by design.  At least have the honesty to own it.

The 2nd amendment was created for protection and self defense. And since it's a legal product to own, firearms are ultimately purchased for reasons specific to the purchaser. Whether a firearm is purchased for self defense, target shooting, collecting, or a paper weight doesn't matter. The fact is that 99.99% of people who own firearms don't murder other people with them. And as long as they are law abiding citizens, it's none of your business why they buy them. Your argument is silly nonsense and you sound like a paranoid old lady.

[Spider-Dan]

Speaking of the definitions of words:

- You're conflating "designed to inflict injury and/or death" with "designed to murder," which is not the same thing
- You're conflating "toxic" with "intoxicate," which are not synonyms in the contexts of recreational drugs (despite their similar spelling)