I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Assault Rifle Vs. Sporting Rifle

Hits: 7816 | Rating: (2.2) | Category: Technology | Added by: Crabes
Page: 1 2 3 46 7 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33895 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 3:50:03 PM

whodat6484
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3590 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 3:41:09 PM
Oh, and good luck trying to get your hands on any rounds for that 37mm launcher that are classified as anti-personnel.

whodat6484
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3590 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 3:32:46 PM
@jops360 - There is a difference between a launcher for a flare and a grenade. They're similar but your friend didn't buy a grenade launcher.

A grenade launcher (M203) has 40mm barrel that is rifled and fires 40mm grenades.

There are 37mm launchers similar to an M203 but the barrel is smaller (-3mm) and not rifled, so good luck trying to chamber and shoot a 40mm HE round out of it.

DrProfessor
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 3884 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 3:12:19 PM
@HumanAction- You forget the power of propaganda. Say a group of citizens end up in an armed conflict with the government over a rights issue.

The government will brand them "domestic terrorists" and call in the national guard or whatever else they deem "necessary." They will not allow themselves to be overthrown, regardless of the legal restraints on their action. We're dealing professional loophole finders here.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 4176 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:56:02 PM
jops360-"was even able to buy a grenade launcher for his "sport rifle". all he had to do was tell them it was for flairs."

Do you KNOW the difference between a tube that will handle grenades and one that will handle flares?

There isn't any.

Btw...THIS is a 'flare':
\

And THIS is a 'flair':


This difference is significant.

FoolsPrussia
Male, 30-39, Western US
 3397 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:49:33 PM
Does anyone remember Kip Kinkel? He was a school shooter in Oregon in 1998. He used a .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle and got off 50 shots. When he tried to reload, several students, including one who was wounded, attacked him and managed to subdue him. Now imagine if he'd had a 100 round magazine.

indisguise
Female, 40-49, Midwest US
 267 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:27:32 PM
Ok, so Adam Lanza didn't have an assault rifle - he still somehow managed to kill 20 kids and 6 adults in roughly 10 minutes using his mothers clearly harmless 'sporting rifle'. I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel sooo much safer knowing that this whack job and his equally questionable mother were heavily armed 'just in case' society collapsed. Who knew elementary school kids were such a threat?

jops360
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 446 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:11:54 PM
the problem with his logic is that ANYONE can go to a local gun show or over the web and buy the parts necessary to turn his "sport rifle" into an assault rifle. doing this requires no additional background checks or age restrictions. they are made for full/burst auto and it takes no additional modifications on the actual gun. i know a guy i work with that makes these guns and he was even able to buy a grenade launcher for his "sport rifle". all he had to do was tell them it was for flairs.we need these guns taken away. they serve no real purpose besides human death.

FoolsPrussia
Male, 30-39, Western US
 3397 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:11:23 PM
"'Cause criminals obey laws like that. "

Here is the problem with that argument. Crimes are specifically defined by the law, yet there are criminals willing to break them. Does that mean it's pointless to have a law against murder or rape? Is the sole function of laws to punish people for breaking them, or is it to also prevent the crime from occurring.

klaxor
Male, 18-29, Western US
 647 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 1:06:08 PM
HumanAction - I understand the point that you are trying to make, at least in regards to the legality of Federal Regulations.

(Of course, interpretation of the Constitution are open to one's own reasonable interpretations.)

Like I stated, though guns may state "Made in USA", that could just as well mean "Assembled in US with Chinese parts". I don't know the extent of laws regarding foreign imports, but I would guess that could be a legal opening. There is also a lack of regulation in interstate (federal jurisdiction) gun sales, which is how many criminals in highly regulated states acquire their weapons.

Also, "the right to bear arms" doesn't just refer to guns, but to all weapons, and some of the pro-gun states have some of the strictest knife laws, and the federal govt has restricted the manufacture/sale of ballistic knives, so there MUST be some sort of precedence for the regulation of guns.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 12:40:07 PM
Sorry but if you are fast on the trigger and can shoot 30 rounds in 30 seconds it is an assault rifle. Only the police and the military should be allowed to have riffles like the AR-15. I'm fine with all the other guns that are legal. I'm not some kind of gun control freak I just don't see any practical purpose of having this type of riffle in the hands of civilians. The negative uses far out way the positive.

markust123
Male, 40-49, Western US
 3784 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 12:35:48 PM
This is funny, just a couple months back you guys were arguing that the tern Assault Riffle was a made up term by the media. That it is not a real term.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 12:30:56 PM
@klaxor

I should also clarify that I am arguing from a philosophical point based on my own interpretation of the Constitution and the Federalist Papers.

Clearly this interpretation is not currently used. As you aptly pointed out, the government regulates beef, cheese, milk... so on and so forth.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 12:27:33 PM
The govt. doesn't just regulate cars b/c they use public goods.

We are saying two different things. You are saying: why does the government regulate cars? I am saying why can the government regulate cars?

The government has the authority to regulate cars because they "use up" a piece of a public good. This is evidenced by the fact that cars aren't regulated; rather, driving is. I don't need a title or license to own a car; I need them to drive the car. Even moreso, I do not need them to drive a car on my own private property.

klaxor
Male, 18-29, Western US
 647 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 12:12:24 PM
"A person walking on the street or sidewalk does not cause damage. This is the same reason that bicycles do not require permits or licenses."

- Yea, but a bicycle crashing isn't going to seriously injure other individuals. The govt. doesn't just regulate cars b/c they use public goods. If you're using public space, with a car or gun, you are more likely to injure people, and/or cause damage to their property, even if only by accident. That's also why you need insurance to drive, at least here in Cali.

Plus, most products in America have some sort of public cost associated with them, but aren't regulated unless they have the potential to do great harm to the public ( think about beef regulation). And, I'm guessing that there a lot of foreign made gun parts floating around, which would open guns to regulation.

Mikeoxsbiggg
Male, 30-39, Canada
 1098 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:54:18 AM
I can see the logic behind what he's saying. Also, thank you for showing me another cool way to combine magazines for the upcoming zombie apcalypse.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:39:53 AM
If you take a gun out of a gun dealership, you will most likely need to take it into a public space.

That's crossing a dangerous line, though. With this argument, one could justify any legislation, since we all enter "public space" every day.

The difference is whether or not we "use" public goods. When we drive, we damage the road. In order to drive, we must buy heavily-subsidized gasoline. In both of these cases, the person is "using" public goods.

A person walking on the street or sidewalk does not cause damage. This is the same reason that bicycles do not require permits or licenses.

HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
 2353 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:32:13 AM
@wibble

As I genuinely don't know is there any view that recent or major perpetrators would be so skilled and practised to be able to do that under pressure during a shooting spree?

It's really quite simple. I think someone who has never fired a gun, yet understands the mechanics of the firearm would lose only a few seconds.... Whether or not those few seconds make a difference is up for debate though.

If the shooter has any significant experience or training, then limited magazine capacity is useless. For instance, a person can drop the magazine when the final round is moved into the chamber and attach a new magazine before firing. In this way, the shooter never gets a lockout situation and has a continuous firing rate.

The only solution, in my opinion, would be to ban semi-automatic weapons - which I am completely opposed to.

MeGrendel
Male, 40-49, Southern US
 4176 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:31:25 AM
CreamK-"Zero guns in the world is the only answer"

Okay, but how do you plan on getting a world with zero guns? It's not possible? You can't un-invent the firearm or gunpowder.

wibble4321-"people seem ok that you should have a licence (and indeed pass a test) to drive a motor vehicle on the highway."

Yes, a contraption that is made up of thousands of parts, weighs tons, has at least 20 controls and requires a publicly funded infrastructure in order to use is comparible with a firearm made up of a dozen parts, with maybe 3 controls. Not even remotely parrallel. (and you're forgetting the 2nd amendment and that you do not require a license if you are driving it somewhere other than on the public infrastructure).

LOOK!! AN 'ASSAULT' BAT!!!

klaxor
Male, 18-29, Western US
 647 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:31:11 AM
"There is a nuance that allows this to be permissible - roadways are publicly funded. To drive on them, one must use public goods; therefore, the public (government) has the right to regulate it. "

- Yes, and in order to get the car out of the dealership, you need to drive on public roads, and therefore need a license. If you take a gun out of a gun dealership, you will most likely need to take it into a public space. If you're going a gun and never take it out of your house, then yeah, you shouldn't need a license.

chimmeychang
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 679 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:27:38 AM
i don't see the problem with having to fill out paperwork to own a gun, and checking to see if you have felonies and history of mental illness seem like a logical thing to do. the bottom line is this though, other people have access to your guns, kids are sneaky, and if they want to go on a murder suicide rampage, i don't think breaking a lock box is really going to slow them down much. I don't know how i feel about guns being banned, i am eventually going to get my permit to carry if it is still legal. the best way to deter criminals from these things is to train and arm citizens assuming guns are legal.

goaliejerry
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 4028 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:22:59 AM
Here is a fun example of how American political parties do not have consistent ideologies, and how when people make political statements they sometimes fail to see their own hypocrisy.

So conservatives (generally) will oppose gun licensing / registration because of some intangible fear that the government will compile a list and raid their homes while they sleep. Hey, it happened under Hitler, right?

But without blinking they will advocate for voter ID laws, saying its the only way to ensure the integrity of the voting process. However they completely ignore the history of (ahem) government sponsored racial oppression inherent in poll-tax requirements, land ownership requirements, and other impediments to the franchise put in place specifically to deny blacks the right to vote.

Just saying, everyone fears the gov't when it's run by the other guys.

MacGuffin
Female, 30-39, Europe
 2597 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:21:08 AM

The media's telling you 'assault weapons' need to be banned for safety. Problem is, assault rifles were banned in 1986.


I see what you did there. You assumed that I gave a shyt about such minutiae. It's like when your politicians try to explain the 'distinction' between waterboarding and torture. I'm looking forward to seeing that testimony at Nuremberg II. :)

dbss
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 32 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:19:47 AM
they just want to ban cool looking guns

wibble4321
Male, 30-39, Asia
 295 Posts
Monday, December 31, 2012 11:17:26 AM
@Humanaction "It isn't. A reasonably skilled shooter can change magazines without a significant change in firing tempo."

As I genuinely don't know is there any view that recent or major perpetrators would be so skilled and practised to be able to do that under pressure during a shooting spree? It would seem that the choice and number of weapons used typically appear to selected to mitigate poor gun skills. Holmes appears to have only purchased his weapons in a relatively short run up to the shooting and purchased 100 round drum magazines, multiple weapons etc. to presumably compensate for a low expectation of accuracy or to inflict maximum number of casualties?

Page: 1 2 3 46 7 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.