Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 638

Dek Rollins said:

If an automatic rifle fires bullets that are capable of killing, how would you remove the power to kill from them exactly?

Just curious what you meant.

Why do the bullets need to have the power to kill is my question.

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

If an automatic rifle fires bullets that are capable of killing, how would you remove the power to kill from them exactly?

Just curious what you meant.

Why do the bullets need to have the power to kill is my question.

Silly Dom, haven’t you ever almost killed someone with a basketball?

dahmage said:

Dek Rollins said:

We need to make thorough background checks and mental evaluations required in every state. Beyond that I don’t think any restrictions on the weapons themselves are necessary or particularly effective. The guns need to be kept out of reach of the kind of people who will commit atrocities, not out of reach of law abiding citizens. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

I know most everyone here disagrees with that sentiment, but that’s how I figure it. Pretty much every shooting that has occurred has happened because there was a neglect for making sure the wrong person doesn’t get the gun.

On another note, if they can’t get guns, they’ll make homemade explosive devices out of fertilizer and blow the school up. If they can’t do that, they’ll take the steak knife from the kitchen and stab some people.

Another problem is the media coverage being way too specific.

From 2016: https://www.news.iastate.edu/news/2016/05/04/mediashootings

name a use for an automatic riffle?

to be fair, most of these mass shooting are done with semi-auto rifles(they fire a round each time the trigger is pulled) and not automatic or fully automatic rifles(when you pull the trigger, they fire round after around after round until the trigger is released or until the weapon runs out of ammo). Even the Las Vegas shooting was technically not done with an automatic or fully automatic rifle. It was with a semi-auto rifle equipped with bump-stock, which for all intends and purposes turns a semi-auto rifle into a fully automatic rifle.

Fully automatic rifles are much more regulated than semi-automatic rifles.

I feel we should get our facts and terminology correct.

What’s the difference between a fully automatic rifle and a semi-automatic rifle with a bump stock?

Nothing.

Therefore the terminology doesn’t matter. The people die no matter what you call the gun.

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

If an automatic rifle fires bullets that are capable of killing, how would you remove the power to kill from them exactly?

Just curious what you meant.

Why do the bullets need to have the power to kill is my question.

I am not sure how you would take the power to kill out of bullets and guns and still be able to call them bullets and guns.

Why does what they’re called matter so much to you?

Dek Rollins said:

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

If an automatic rifle fires bullets that are capable of killing, how would you remove the power to kill from them exactly?

Just curious what you meant.

Why do the bullets need to have the power to kill is my question.

Like, rubber bullets?

So your solution is to keep the guns but ban real bullets?

I guess it’s not the worst idea.

Ok Warb. They should ban semi-autos as well as fully-auto weapons for civilians. Happy?

Dek Rollins said:

TV’s Frink said:

Dek Rollins said:

DominicCobb said:

Dek Rollins said:

If an automatic rifle fires bullets that are capable of killing, how would you remove the power to kill from them exactly?

Just curious what you meant.

Why do the bullets need to have the power to kill is my question.

Like, rubber bullets?

So your solution is to keep the guns but ban real bullets?

I guess it’s not the worst idea.

That’s not my idea, I was just trying to figure out Dom’s “remove the lethal part of the guns” thing. I’m not aware of how lethal rubber bullets can be, so I don’t even know if that would be a good solution to his inquiry.

I did a quick skim on google and it seems like you can die from the impact, but it’s much less likely.

I would assume blanks would be a better idea.

chyron8472 said:

DominicCobb said:

I get why people like shooting automatic rifles at firing ranges. I get it.

I don’t.

Explain it to me. Why is this required as a potential pastime in this country?

Because 'murica.

Dek Rollins said:

chyron8472 said:

DominicCobb said:

I get why people like shooting automatic rifles at firing ranges. I get it.

I don’t.

Explain it to me. Why is this required as a potential pastime in this country?

Since when is any pastime “required”? A lot of people have a lot of fun shooting targets. When you add semi-auto or auto fire, it is just a different way to entertain yourself than with single-fire manual-cock guns.

And to those people I say “too fucking bad.”

Can you name any other type of “entertainment” that is potentially this dangerous, this frequently?

TV’s Frink said:

What’s the difference between a fully automatic rifle and a semi-automatic rifle with a bump stock?

Nothing.

I believe I did mention bump stocks in my post above.

Again I agree for basically all intents and purposes, they are the same. But technically they are two different things.

Here is a good video that shows the difference between the two

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd9y8hHMUag&feature=youtu.be&t=26s

Therefore the terminology doesn’t matter.

The terminology does matter. Semi-auto weapons and fully-auto weapons are two different things. If we are going to decide what guns to ban and what not, we’d better understand these things. Also the other side uses the fact that the pro gun control people don’t understand these things as way to argue against them.

TV’s Frink said:

Why does what they’re called matter so much to you?

I simply like getting the facts and terminology correct, that is all. Also again it can be argued that it makes us(the pro gun control side) look foolish when we don’t get these things correct.

Collipso said:

Ok Warb. They should ban semi-autos as well as fully-auto weapons for civilians. Happy?

ok.

chyron8472 said:

DominicCobb said:

I get why people like shooting automatic rifles at firing ranges. I get it.

I don’t.

Explain it to me. Why is this required as a potential pastime in this country?

I wouldn’t say it is required, but I could see it as being fun.

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

They are

10/10 great sentence.

oops. typo deleted.