Military-Grade, Assault Weapons

[FormerlySec38Row34 56]

AR 15's are assault rifles in that they can pop off 45 rounds per minute. Just because they don't have "select fire" function of a military assault rifle, that doesn't make it a weapon of the same power as a handgun. Why are the AR variants so common in mass shootings if others are just as effective in its semi automatic state? When I used the M4 in the military at semi-auto (which is basically the same as the AR,) the M4 was considered an assault rifle; therefore, when I use the AR( civilian version of M4) at semi auto, it's an assault rifle as well.

Also, the AR 15 can illegally be tinkered with to make the weapon shoot three round bursts or shoot full auto. I believe the terrorists in San Bernadino altered their rifles in this way. Make no mistake, AR 15's are assault rifles.

BS. Assault rifles have the capability of firing 10 times that rate. 45 rounds per minute is less than 1 round per second. That's painfully slow compared to full-auto. An assault rifle, by definition, has to have the select-fire or full-auto capability. Most times, when an AR is ILLEGALLY "tinkered with", it ends up emptying the magazine even if you release the trigger. Also, if an AR is fired rapid fire (not even full-auto) with an aluminum receiver and high-capacity mags, it will eventually jam, rendering it unusable. This has happened on more than one mass shooting. As I stated in another thread, the reason AR's are so common in mass shootings is that they are the most prevalent sporting rifle in the U.S.They are made by hundreds of manufacturers. Every single gun store in America has a wide variety of configurations and large numbers in stock. They are relatively inexpensive, readily accessorized and the ammo is very inexpensive (and readily available in quantity) compared to other calibers. You can get the same performance from a mini-fourteen, but they are very expensive by comparison.

The Maximum effective rate of fire the M4 is 45 rounds per minute at semi automatic....Which is the same as the AR at Semiautomatic. Pay attention

At burst, the max auto is 90 rpm....Not even close to being 10 times over the rate of the AR 15. Again, I noted the AR doesnt have burst, even though some people choose to manipulate their weapons in order to increase the rate of fire.

At sustained, 12-15 rpm.

If you don't consider M4's assault rifles, then the debate is pointless. Because it is obvious the purpose of the weapons...

The M4 is by definition, an assault rifle. The select-fire switch makes it so. If the M4 was semi-auto only, then it would not be. The M1 Garand was a semi-auto rifle. The M14 is an assault rifle. The M2 carbine is an assault rifle. They may have removed the full-auto in favor of the burst-fire, but that was more for sustained control and ammo conservation than for any other reason. That's why they have SAW's for covering and suppressing fire. But the AR has never been an assault rifle and never will be, if you use the military definition of an assault rifle.

Do you know how many times I used the Burst feature on my M4? Zero times other than a couple times at bootcamp. Does that mean I was really just using a long gun and not an assault rifle when I engaged the enemy with my M4 at semi-automatic fire? Who cares. It worked very well for war and that is what matters.

Just because you didn't use it doesn't change the fact that it was there. The military still doesn't consider a rifle without the selective fire feature an assault rifle. There are a ton of semi-auto sporting rifles out there. The AR15 was developed for the civilian market in the same way that the M1A was. People liked the military version, but the government wouldn't let a selective fire rifle be sold in the civilian market. Same thing with the AR. It is not an assault rifle. Neither is the M1A

[aujeff11 6,243]

AR 15's are assault rifles in that they can pop off 45 rounds per minute. Just because they don't have "select fire" function of a military assault rifle, that doesn't make it a weapon of the same power as a handgun. Why are the AR variants so common in mass shootings if others are just as effective in its semi automatic state? When I used the M4 in the military at semi-auto (which is basically the same as the AR,) the M4 was considered an assault rifle; therefore, when I use the AR( civilian version of M4) at semi auto, it's an assault rifle as well.

Also, the AR 15 can illegally be tinkered with to make the weapon shoot three round bursts or shoot full auto. I believe the terrorists in San Bernadino altered their rifles in this way. Make no mistake, AR 15's are assault rifles.

BS. Assault rifles have the capability of firing 10 times that rate. 45 rounds per minute is less than 1 round per second. That's painfully slow compared to full-auto. An assault rifle, by definition, has to have the select-fire or full-auto capability. Most times, when an AR is ILLEGALLY "tinkered with", it ends up emptying the magazine even if you release the trigger. Also, if an AR is fired rapid fire (not even full-auto) with an aluminum receiver and high-capacity mags, it will eventually jam, rendering it unusable. This has happened on more than one mass shooting. As I stated in another thread, the reason AR's are so common in mass shootings is that they are the most prevalent sporting rifle in the U.S.They are made by hundreds of manufacturers. Every single gun store in America has a wide variety of configurations and large numbers in stock. They are relatively inexpensive, readily accessorized and the ammo is very inexpensive (and readily available in quantity) compared to other calibers. You can get the same performance from a mini-fourteen, but they are very expensive by comparison.

The Maximum effective rate of fire the M4 is 45 rounds per minute at semi automatic....Which is the same as the AR at Semiautomatic. Pay attention

At burst, the max auto is 90 rpm....Not even close to being 10 times over the rate of the AR 15. Again, I noted the AR doesnt have burst, even though some people choose to manipulate their weapons in order to increase the rate of fire.

At sustained, 12-15 rpm.

If you don't consider M4's assault rifles, then the debate is pointless. Because it is obvious the purpose of the weapons...

The M4 is by definition, an assault rifle. The select-fire switch makes it so. If the M4 was semi-auto only, then it would not be. The M1 Garand was a semi-auto rifle. The M14 is an assault rifle. The M2 carbine is an assault rifle. They may have removed the full-auto in favor of the burst-fire, but that was more for sustained control and ammo conservation than for any other reason. That's why they have SAW's for covering and suppressing fire. But the AR has never been an assault rifle and never will be, if you use the military definition of an assault rifle.

Do you know how many times I used the Burst feature on my M4? Zero times other than a couple times at bootcamp. Does that mean I was really just using a long gun and not an assault rifle when I engaged the enemy with my M4 at semi-automatic fire? Who cares. It worked very well for war and that is what matters.

Just because you didn't use it doesn't change the fact that it was there. The military still doesn't consider a rifle without the selective fire feature an assault rifle. There are a ton of semi-auto sporting rifles out there. The AR15 was developed for the civilian market in the same way that the M1A was. People liked the military version, but the government wouldn't let a selective fire rifle be sold in the civilian market. Same thing with the AR. It is not an assault rifle. Neither is the M1A

We are not going to disagree. A feature that I never used doesnt make it an assault rifle. It just doesnt. That specific feature, the selective fire, is only good for wasting ammo and causing your weapon to cook off.

[FormerlySec38Row34 56]

AR 15's are assault rifles in that they can pop off 45 rounds per minute. Just because they don't have "select fire" function of a military assault rifle, that doesn't make it a weapon of the same power as a handgun. Why are the AR variants so common in mass shootings if others are just as effective in its semi automatic state? When I used the M4 in the military at semi-auto (which is basically the same as the AR,) the M4 was considered an assault rifle; therefore, when I use the AR( civilian version of M4) at semi auto, it's an assault rifle as well.

Also, the AR 15 can illegally be tinkered with to make the weapon shoot three round bursts or shoot full auto. I believe the terrorists in San Bernadino altered their rifles in this way. Make no mistake, AR 15's are assault rifles.

BS. Assault rifles have the capability of firing 10 times that rate. 45 rounds per minute is less than 1 round per second. That's painfully slow compared to full-auto. An assault rifle, by definition, has to have the select-fire or full-auto capability. Most times, when an AR is ILLEGALLY "tinkered with", it ends up emptying the magazine even if you release the trigger. Also, if an AR is fired rapid fire (not even full-auto) with an aluminum receiver and high-capacity mags, it will eventually jam, rendering it unusable. This has happened on more than one mass shooting. As I stated in another thread, the reason AR's are so common in mass shootings is that they are the most prevalent sporting rifle in the U.S.They are made by hundreds of manufacturers. Every single gun store in America has a wide variety of configurations and large numbers in stock. They are relatively inexpensive, readily accessorized and the ammo is very inexpensive (and readily available in quantity) compared to other calibers. You can get the same performance from a mini-fourteen, but they are very expensive by comparison.

The Maximum effective rate of fire the M4 is 45 rounds per minute at semi automatic....Which is the same as the AR at Semiautomatic. Pay attention

At burst, the max auto is 90 rpm....Not even close to being 10 times over the rate of the AR 15. Again, I noted the AR doesnt have burst, even though some people choose to manipulate their weapons in order to increase the rate of fire.

At sustained, 12-15 rpm.

If you don't consider M4's assault rifles, then the debate is pointless. Because it is obvious the purpose of the weapons...

The M4 is by definition, an assault rifle. The select-fire switch makes it so. If the M4 was semi-auto only, then it would not be. The M1 Garand was a semi-auto rifle. The M14 is an assault rifle. The M2 carbine is an assault rifle. They may have removed the full-auto in favor of the burst-fire, but that was more for sustained control and ammo conservation than for any other reason. That's why they have SAW's for covering and suppressing fire. But the AR has never been an assault rifle and never will be, if you use the military definition of an assault rifle.

Do you know how many times I used the Burst feature on my M4? Zero times other than a couple times at bootcamp. Does that mean I was really just using a long gun and not an assault rifle when I engaged the enemy with my M4 at semi-automatic fire? Who cares. It worked very well for war and that is what matters.

Just because you didn't use it doesn't change the fact that it was there. The military still doesn't consider a rifle without the selective fire feature an assault rifle. There are a ton of semi-auto sporting rifles out there. The AR15 was developed for the civilian market in the same way that the M1A was. People liked the military version, but the government wouldn't let a selective fire rifle be sold in the civilian market. Same thing with the AR. It is not an assault rifle. Neither is the M1A

We are not going to disagree. A feature that I never used doesnt make it an assault rifle. It just doesnt. That specific feature, the selective fire, is only good for wasting ammo and causing your weapon to cook off.

I never commented on the usefulness of the selective fire feature on the M4, but the ability to fire in burst or full-auto mode is exactly what makes an assault rifle,

The army doesn't designate any of its small arms as "assault rifles", but there is a generally accepted military definition. Please read the following

Army Gives Definition Of Assault Rifle - tulprpc.org

[aujeff11 6,243]

AR 15's are assault rifles in that they can pop off 45 rounds per minute. Just because they don't have "select fire" function of a military assault rifle, that doesn't make it a weapon of the same power as a handgun. Why are the AR variants so common in mass shootings if others are just as effective in its semi automatic state? When I used the M4 in the military at semi-auto (which is basically the same as the AR,) the M4 was considered an assault rifle; therefore, when I use the AR( civilian version of M4) at semi auto, it's an assault rifle as well.

Also, the AR 15 can illegally be tinkered with to make the weapon shoot three round bursts or shoot full auto. I believe the terrorists in San Bernadino altered their rifles in this way. Make no mistake, AR 15's are assault rifles.

BS. Assault rifles have the capability of firing 10 times that rate. 45 rounds per minute is less than 1 round per second. That's painfully slow compared to full-auto. An assault rifle, by definition, has to have the select-fire or full-auto capability. Most times, when an AR is ILLEGALLY "tinkered with", it ends up emptying the magazine even if you release the trigger. Also, if an AR is fired rapid fire (not even full-auto) with an aluminum receiver and high-capacity mags, it will eventually jam, rendering it unusable. This has happened on more than one mass shooting. As I stated in another thread, the reason AR's are so common in mass shootings is that they are the most prevalent sporting rifle in the U.S.They are made by hundreds of manufacturers. Every single gun store in America has a wide variety of configurations and large numbers in stock. They are relatively inexpensive, readily accessorized and the ammo is very inexpensive (and readily available in quantity) compared to other calibers. You can get the same performance from a mini-fourteen, but they are very expensive by comparison.

The Maximum effective rate of fire the M4 is 45 rounds per minute at semi automatic....Which is the same as the AR at Semiautomatic. Pay attention

At burst, the max auto is 90 rpm....Not even close to being 10 times over the rate of the AR 15. Again, I noted the AR doesnt have burst, even though some people choose to manipulate their weapons in order to increase the rate of fire.

At sustained, 12-15 rpm.

If you don't consider M4's assault rifles, then the debate is pointless. Because it is obvious the purpose of the weapons...

The M4 is by definition, an assault rifle. The select-fire switch makes it so. If the M4 was semi-auto only, then it would not be. The M1 Garand was a semi-auto rifle. The M14 is an assault rifle. The M2 carbine is an assault rifle. They may have removed the full-auto in favor of the burst-fire, but that was more for sustained control and ammo conservation than for any other reason. That's why they have SAW's for covering and suppressing fire. But the AR has never been an assault rifle and never will be, if you use the military definition of an assault rifle.

Do you know how many times I used the Burst feature on my M4? Zero times other than a couple times at bootcamp. Does that mean I was really just using a long gun and not an assault rifle when I engaged the enemy with my M4 at semi-automatic fire? Who cares. It worked very well for war and that is what matters.

Just because you didn't use it doesn't change the fact that it was there. The military still doesn't consider a rifle without the selective fire feature an assault rifle. There are a ton of semi-auto sporting rifles out there. The AR15 was developed for the civilian market in the same way that the M1A was. People liked the military version, but the government wouldn't let a selective fire rifle be sold in the civilian market. Same thing with the AR. It is not an assault rifle. Neither is the M1A

We are not going to disagree. A feature that I never used doesnt make it an assault rifle. It just doesnt. That specific feature, the selective fire, is only good for wasting ammo and causing your weapon to cook off.

I never commented on the usefulness of the selective fire feature on the M4, but the ability to fire in burst or full-auto mode is exactly what makes an assault rifle,

The army doesn't designate any of its small arms as "assault rifles", but there is a generally accepted military definition. Please read the following

Army Gives Definition Of Assault Rifle - tulprpc.org

Good info..Didnt realize the selective fire option changed the outlook of the weapon that much. That info carries no weight at all to my opinion though. People in the military do controlled pairs unless using crew serves..

[alexava 6,974]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

only licensed farmers can buy amonium nitrate now.

[FormerlySec38Row34 56]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

only licensed farmers can buy amonium nitrate now.

There must be more than one form of ammonium nitrate then, because I just searched for it and there are literally hundreds of ads for it from ebay to Amazon and elsewhere.

[japantiger 4,104]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

Making way too much sense here...obviously we can't have that. What's really tiring is we knew this guy was trouble...been investigated twice...our all knowing, all seeing DHS apparently actually employed him for crying out loud...he goes and returns from SA twice...studying under a radical purveyor of hate...and yet, somehow, no red flags....sound like a familiar pattern? 9-11 guys, Boston Bombers, etc...how about just competent law enforcement from our multi-trillion $$ DHS (name still creeps me out...sounds like something Stalin would have created)....nah....

[alexava 6,974]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

only licensed farmers can buy amonium nitrate now.

There must be more than one form of ammonium nitrate then, because I just searched for it and there are literally hundreds of ads for it from ebay to Amazon and elsewhere.

http://www.businessinsider.com/oklahoma-city-bombing-ammonium-nitrate-sales-regulated-2011-8

where i used to buy it they will not even sell to non licensed farmers anymore. maybe other places that will.

[alexava 6,974]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

Making way too much sense here...obviously we can't have that. What's really tiring is we knew this guy was trouble...been investigated twice...our all knowing, all seeing DHS apparently actually employed him for crying out loud...he goes and returns from SA twice...studying under a radical purveyor of hate...and yet, somehow, no red flags....sound like a familiar pattern? 9-11 guys, Boston Bombers, etc...how about just competent law enforcement from our multi-trillion $$ DHS (name still creeps me out...sounds like something Stalin would have created)....nah....

should have been under constant NSA watch.

[FormerlySec38Row34 56]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

only licensed farmers can buy amonium nitrate now.

There must be more than one form of ammonium nitrate then, because I just searched for it and there are literally hundreds of ads for it from ebay to Amazon and elsewhere.

http://www.businessi...egulated-2011-8

where i used to buy it they will not even sell to non licensed farmers anymore. maybe other places that will.

Showing how much I don't know about AN, how much would it take to make a bomb that could take out a relatively small building? The article said that it regulated sales over 25lb, but a long-term planner could buy small amounts over a long period of time. We know that terrorists think in the long term while we look for short-term answers. Tricky balance between security and freedom.

[RunInRed 18,113]

[aujeff11 6,243]

AUUSN, you're former military, what is your take on the AR's not being considered assault weapons just because of it not having the pointless three round burst?

[aujeff11 6,243]

Also, if the AR 15 isn't considered an "assault weapon," maybe that distinction is irrelevant. Supposedly the Orlando shooter shot around a thousand rounds in as little as 10 minutes. If that's not an assault weapon characteristic, I don't know what is. BTW, how did he carry all them 30 round magazines? Standard combat load in the army is still 210 rounds.... Lol!!!

[AUUSN 823]

AUUSN, you're former military, what is your take on the AR's not being considered assault weapons just because of it not having the pointless three round burst?

A rapid firing weapon with a high magazine capacity is by definition an assault weapon.

[AUUSN 823]

Also, if the AR 15 isn't considered an "assault weapon," maybe that distinction is irrelevant. Supposedly the Orlando shooter shot around a thousand rounds in as little as 10 minutes. If that's not an assault weapon characteristic, I don't know what is. BTW, how did he carry all them 30 round magazines? Standard combat load in the army is still 210 rounds.... Lol!!!

The shooter used a Sig Sauer MCX a weapon Army SF calls the "Black Mamba"

[aujeff11 6,243]

[AURaptor 1,137]

2nd Amendment isn't about " sport or hunting ".

[Strychnine 1,808]

In all this talk about banning sporting rifles, or assault rifles, or whatever you want to call them, no one has mentioned how to enact such a ban. My three NFA weapons (automatic) are worth over $100,000. My collection of semi-auto AK-47's and AR-15's is probably worth over $10,000. Does anyone think I am just going to hand those over for little or no compensation? Do the millions of currently owned AR-15's get grandfathered?

Conservatives are never going to vote for the cost of buying all of these banned rifles. No owner of any of these rifles will ever support a ban that does not include appropriate compensation or grandfathering (if you can get them to support a ban at all). The NRA, and all gun advocacy groups, will fight it tooth and nail. Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?

The bottom line to me is that the type of firearms this killer used are ultimately irrelevant. The important thing is that he had no business possessing a firearm of any type, whether it be an AR-15 or a single-shot .22LR. I do not want such people to possess an AR-15, or a Glock 17, or a shotgun. Why don't we concentrate on that? Proposals crafted with the goal of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands are proposals I can get behind.

[alexava 6,974]

I hope you have insurance.

[japantiger 4,104]

stay away from some of us who want to own AR-15's or other guns...you fail to blame the cause of why this happened. I didn't read anyone yell about fertilizer after the ok city bombing....and those calling people dumb because we don't agree with you wanting to ban weapons, you should look in the mirror. There is a radicalization going on in this country in the mosques being lead by wabbisim of the islamic religion whether you believe it or not. Some of our so called leaders have been brainwashed to be so PC that they refuse to call it out. There have been many links over the years to the brotherhood, etc that preach this kind of hate but some of you blame the guns...there are probably over 3 million of the ARs in this country that are owned by mostly law abiding citizens but when something like this happens some of you loose your minds and blame the gun....well someone has to pull the trigger and with that some of these killers are either deranged or they follow a certain type of fanatical religion. If you have ever spent time in certain parts of the world or even opened your eyes to it you would see it. Most on this board haven't spent much time with the locals in the middle east where this comes from. You would be thinking differently if you had and listened to some of what is being said over there...there are too many people out there that hate out of religion...that is the problem...corrupt religion is the main culprit and that isn't what is being called out in most of these cases....why? who the heck knows unless it is people who don't want to be offensive or be perceived as offensive...that is our problem...

Making way too much sense here...obviously we can't have that. What's really tiring is we knew this guy was trouble...been investigated twice...our all knowing, all seeing DHS apparently actually employed him for crying out loud...he goes and returns from SA twice...studying under a radical purveyor of hate...and yet, somehow, no red flags....sound like a familiar pattern? 9-11 guys, Boston Bombers, etc...how about just competent law enforcement from our multi-trillion $$ DHS (name still creeps me out...sounds like something Stalin would have created)....nah....

should have been under constant NSA watch.

Yes. We spend precious time and resource trying to listen to Grandma's phone calls on multi-billion $$ IT boondoggles or do cavity searches on 10 year olds in the Cleveland airport...but can't watch the obvious ones ... this whole apparatus needs to be torn down and start over with good, old fashioned, basic police methods tied to likely threats.

[aujeff11 6,243]

In all this talk about banning sporting rifles, or assault rifles, or whatever you want to call them, no one has mentioned how to enact such a ban. My three NFA weapons (automatic) are worth over $100,000. My collection of semi-auto AK-47's and AR-15's is probably worth over $10,000. Does anyone think I am just going to hand those over for little or no compensation? Do the millions of currently owned AR-15's get grandfathered?

Conservatives are never going to vote for the cost of buying all of these banned rifles. No owner of any of these rifles will ever support a ban that does not include appropriate compensation or grandfathering (if you can get them to support a ban at all). The NRA, and all gun advocacy groups, will fight it tooth and nail. Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?

The bottom line to me is that the type of firearms this killer used are ultimately irrelevant. The important thing is that he had no business possessing a firearm of any type, whether it be an AR-15 or a single-shot .22LR. I do not want such people to possess an AR-15, or a Glock 17, or a shotgun. Why don't we concentrate on that? Proposals crafted with the goal of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands are proposals I can get behind.

Its not as simple as saying we need to keep them out of the wrong hands. Who are the wrong hands? I believe many vets don't need to carry as a matter of fact. Many people with mental disabilities don't need the weapons but where is the line in saying you can possess one but the other can't. Because in actuality, you're saying you can have a pistol, but this guy shouldn't have one and he is SOL if he is ever attacked. On the other end, I don't believe being a felon at one point automatically disfranchises the person from carrying. Also, Muslim Americans deserve to carry too if the public can. Saying otherwise is discriminatory. There are just so many questions to contemplate that it's hard to make such decisions, but still, it's better than being a brainless NRA sheep.

[japantiger 4,104]

In all this talk about banning sporting rifles, or assault rifles, or whatever you want to call them, no one has mentioned how to enact such a ban. My three NFA weapons (automatic) are worth over $100,000. My collection of semi-auto AK-47's and AR-15's is probably worth over $10,000. Does anyone think I am just going to hand those over for little or no compensation? Do the millions of currently owned AR-15's get grandfathered?

Conservatives are never going to vote for the cost of buying all of these banned rifles. No owner of any of these rifles will ever support a ban that does not include appropriate compensation or grandfathering (if you can get them to support a ban at all). The NRA, and all gun advocacy groups, will fight it tooth and nail. Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?

The bottom line to me is that the type of firearms this killer used are ultimately irrelevant. The important thing is that he had no business possessing a firearm of any type, whether it be an AR-15 or a single-shot .22LR. I do not want such people to possess an AR-15, or a Glock 17, or a shotgun. Why don't we concentrate on that? Proposals crafted with the goal of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands are proposals I can get behind.

"Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?"

Makes way too much sense...but doing the real hard work that it takes to make a difference both in terms of tearing down the current LE infrastructure and attitudinal changes required to piss some people off has no political capital for the chattering DC political class. Neither party, lead by their current traditional leadership (or lack of leadership) class will take this approach. They want big broad strokes that can be explained in 10 words or less...result be damned...I mean, if bans worked, Chicago and DC would be a utopian gunless, drugless paradises....

[Strychnine 1,808]

In all this talk about banning sporting rifles, or assault rifles, or whatever you want to call them, no one has mentioned how to enact such a ban. My three NFA weapons (automatic) are worth over $100,000. My collection of semi-auto AK-47's and AR-15's is probably worth over $10,000. Does anyone think I am just going to hand those over for little or no compensation? Do the millions of currently owned AR-15's get grandfathered?

Conservatives are never going to vote for the cost of buying all of these banned rifles. No owner of any of these rifles will ever support a ban that does not include appropriate compensation or grandfathering (if you can get them to support a ban at all). The NRA, and all gun advocacy groups, will fight it tooth and nail. Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?

The bottom line to me is that the type of firearms this killer used are ultimately irrelevant. The important thing is that he had no business possessing a firearm of any type, whether it be an AR-15 or a single-shot .22LR. I do not want such people to possess an AR-15, or a Glock 17, or a shotgun. Why don't we concentrate on that? Proposals crafted with the goal of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands are proposals I can get behind.

Its not as simple as saying we need to keep them out of the wrong hands. Who are the wrong hands? I believe many vets don't need to carry as a matter of fact. Many people with mental disabilities don't need the weapons but where is the line in saying you can possess one but the other can't. Because in actuality, you're saying you can have a pistol, but this guy shouldn't have one and he is SOL if he is ever attacked. On the other end, I don't believe being a felon at one point automatically disfranchises the person from carrying. Also, Muslim Americans deserve to carry too if the public can. Saying otherwise is discriminatory. There are just so many questions to contemplate that it's hard to make such decisions, but still, it's better than being a brainless NRA sheep.

Which I am clearly not. I agree with the NRA in that I disagree vehemently with banning any category of firearm, primarily because I do not believe it to be the solution or even practically possible in a way that would actually produce results. I disagree with the NRA in that they automatically oppose any gun legislation as their default position.

I never said it was as simple as keeping firearms out of the wrong hands, I am saying that is where we need to start (as in that should be our goal) if we are going to discuss firearm legislation of any sort. Personally, I think part of the problem with the background check system is that it relies solely on criminal convictions in order to disqualify people from purchasing a firearm, and is designed to operate more quickly than accurately. Licensing is a good starting point to me. It is easier to buy a firearm than it is to obtain a driver's license, much less purchase and subsequently register a vehicle, and I have always thought that was ridiculous. It can be something as simple as an endorsement or symbol on a driver's license, but something that signifies you have gone through an exhaustive background check that I do think should include an interview or two with family members, coworkers, and acquaintances. Firearms are simply too easy to purchase, through dealers or private sellers, and I think that is much more of a problem than whether or not someone can purchase or possess an AR-15.

[aujeff11 6,243]

In all this talk about banning sporting rifles, or assault rifles, or whatever you want to call them, no one has mentioned how to enact such a ban. My three NFA weapons (automatic) are worth over $100,000. My collection of semi-auto AK-47's and AR-15's is probably worth over $10,000. Does anyone think I am just going to hand those over for little or no compensation? Do the millions of currently owned AR-15's get grandfathered?

Conservatives are never going to vote for the cost of buying all of these banned rifles. No owner of any of these rifles will ever support a ban that does not include appropriate compensation or grandfathering (if you can get them to support a ban at all). The NRA, and all gun advocacy groups, will fight it tooth and nail. Instead of concentrating on irrational knee-jerk proposals to ban firearms that millions of people own and use without incident, why not concentrate on proposals that might actually be able to gain traction with people like me?

The bottom line to me is that the type of firearms this killer used are ultimately irrelevant. The important thing is that he had no business possessing a firearm of any type, whether it be an AR-15 or a single-shot .22LR. I do not want such people to possess an AR-15, or a Glock 17, or a shotgun. Why don't we concentrate on that? Proposals crafted with the goal of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands are proposals I can get behind.

Its not as simple as saying we need to keep them out of the wrong hands. Who are the wrong hands? I believe many vets don't need to carry as a matter of fact. Many people with mental disabilities don't need the weapons but where is the line in saying you can possess one but the other can't. Because in actuality, you're saying you can have a pistol, but this guy shouldn't have one and he is SOL if he is ever attacked. On the other end, I don't believe being a felon at one point automatically disfranchises the person from carrying. Also, Muslim Americans deserve to carry too if the public can. Saying otherwise is discriminatory. There are just so many questions to contemplate that it's hard to make such decisions, but still, it's better than being a brainless NRA sheep.

Which I am clearly not. I agree with the NRA in that I disagree vehemently with banning any category of firearm, primarily because I do not believe it to be the solution or even practically possible in a way that would actually produce results. I disagree with the NRA in that they automatically oppose any gun legislation as their default position.

I never said it was as simple as keeping firearms out of the wrong hands, I am saying that is where we need to start (as in that should be our goal) if we are going to discuss firearm legislation of any sort. Personally, I think part of the problem with the background check system is that it relies solely on criminal convictions in order to disqualify people from purchasing a firearm, and is designed to operate more quickly than accurately. Licensing is a good starting point to me. It is easier to buy a firearm than it is to obtain a driver's license, much less purchase and subsequently register a vehicle, and I have always thought that was ridiculous. It can be something as simple as an endorsement or symbol on a driver's license, but something that signifies you have gone through an exhaustive background check that I do think should include an interview or two with family members, coworkers, and acquaintances. Firearms are simply too easy to purchase, through dealers or private sellers, and I think that is much more of a problem than whether or not someone can purchase or possess an AR-15.

I didn't mean that you were as brainless as the sheep or anything like that. I was saying it's better to tackle the problems than just to pretend that we don't have a gun violence problem.Not many posters are as even-handed as you are. I have no problems with the licensing requirements, certifications even better, as long as the process is as rigorous as you say it will be.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Cannot blame Barry

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_575e4801e4b0ced23ca879bb