Gun ownership itself is a slight mental illness

There’s a big difference between a paring knife or even a veggie chopper and a stiletto or switch blade. There’s a big difference between a hunting rifle with a 3or even a 6 round magazine and an assault rifle with a 50 shot magazine. There’s a big difference between brass knuckles and boxing gloves for supervised boxing. Most places are fine with prohibiting two of the later examples but not the gun example. I know some places think any of the above are ok in a church or school, really!!

 

Oh I'm fine with background checks and a ban on large-capacity magazines. Ten-round magazines are sufficient for any hunting or home defense needs.

 

The specific class of gun that the term "assault weapon" refers to is the semiautomatic. And that is an inaccurate designation. As I have said, the term "assault weapon" was created in order to expand the list of guns that some want banned. Your acquiescence to whatever comes out of a legal authority's mouth basically amounts to insisting it be so because daddy said. And your insistence that I shouldn't have an AR-5 if I can't tell you why I choose to own one is simply you trying to extend that parent-child relationship you have with authority onto me. No thanks, I don't bend over because someone tells me to.

An assault rifle has a select-fire option. An assault STYLE rifle does not have a select-fire option. If a rifle is not select-fire, then it is called a semiautomatic rifle, and NOT an assault rifle. So, if you believe that a semiautomatic rifle is an assault rifle by virtue of its appearance and despite its lack of select-fire capability, then you believe that style equals function. But style does not equal function. You may be inclined believe that it does because someone told you it does, but don't expect others to share your willingness to bend.

 

Well … regardless … I don't think you should be allowed to own any gun … period. This world would be much better off without guns. We just can not have a bunch of white nationalists going around and killing Mexican immigrants just because they woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

 

Day after Midland, Odessa shootings, Texas gun laws will be more lenient

Is is too early for "thoughts and prayers"?

 

I say we take their diesel pickups right along with the guns. The white nationalists MAGA Hat guys can start riding bicycle.

 

So this is an example of the "good" kind of bigotry then?

 

I see the discriminatory slant you're assigning to that, but it's really hard for me to consider that bigotry. More like practicality. ...or something

 

Is that because of who it is directed at, as a group? Seriously, I want to know how it's possible to have "good" bigotry.

 

10 injured in shooting after high school football game in Alabama

makes it no less a mass shooting just because he sucks at it..

 

The short answer is: YES. It is a good kind of bigotry. Who wouldn't want to be bigoted against a bunch of white nationalists who kill innocent people with guns. I would like to add that the white nationalists just sent Jimmy Al Daoud, a Christian man who had been born in Greece, to Iraq where he died, for lack of insulin. He was diabetic, and homeless, and did not speak the language; but, the white nationalists sent him to Iraq.

 

I seriously and honestly doubt that.

 

If an assault weapon is a semiautomatic rifle, I don't need a rationale for owning one. But you need a rationale for continuing to believe that a semiautomatic rifle is an assault weapon when you've had the difference spelled out to you over and over and over again.

All semiautomatics fire one shot per trigger pull. You're still under the impression that some semiautomatic rifles are not semiautomatic rifles because someone told you to think that way. In that respect, you have a real problem with authority.

If we disregard the automatic firing mode, then what you are left with is a semiautomatic rifle. You know this, but you've invested so much effort into denying it that it's now a matter of obsession.

You believe that the public shouldn't have access to an AR-15 because it is a semiautomatic rifle with a pistol grip to which you have assigned supernatural powers.

And no, the AR-15 is not functionally the same as a handgun; it is a rifle.

 

you seem to be saying that "this doesn't equal that".

If we look at the various jurisdictions of law, there may be subtle differences but they are essentially considered to be certain semiautomatic rifles. For most intensive purposes, the AR (and please don't ask me "why" or "how") is an assault weapon. They're proposing banning that weapon all over. And with good reason; it's been used to kill time and time again.

So, can we say goodbye to it? I don't want one. hmmph

EDIT: California list has lots and lots of disallowed weapons. I don't think the bill found the support it needed though.

 

You said that the AR-15 is a semiautomatic rifle. You believe that it is an assault weapon. It is not an assault weapon. Perhaps you'd care to explain the difference between semiautomatic rifles that are assault rifles in your mind, and semiautomatic rifles that are not assault rifles in your mind.

You said that some semiautomatic rifles are assault weapons. If you're going to be consistent in your convictions, it goes to follow that you must believe that some semiautomatic rifles are not assault weapons. So which is it?

The AR-15 looks like a military weapon, but it is incapable of automatic fire. Other than obsession, why do think I can't have one? Your problem is that it looks scary, and you've come to equate style with function. You were wrong about that to begin with, and you're still wrong.

I'm glad to hear that you believe that there is no such thing as supernatural. Now if you could just apply that bit of wisdom to your obsession with the AR-15 . . .

 

Well, round and round you go; I'm just following you.

Yes, some legal authorities arbitrarily decided to expand the definition of assault weapon to include a rifle that is not an assault weapon. If you choose to bow to those who inaccurately assign assault weapon status to semiautomatic rifles, that's fine. But don't expect everyone to share your willingness to buy into that deception.

I'm opposed to any law that arbitrarily assigns assault weapon status to a rifle based on how its appearance strikes them.