Bushmaster

[sirs]

Why oh why oh why do anti constitutional folks keep trying to imply that the 2nd amendment is about hunters and their need to .....hunt apparently.       Did the entire radical left flunk American History, how this country came about, and what the Constitution, specifically the Bill of Rights is all about?? 

[Christians4LessGvt]

The Founding Fathers did not live in the same country or the same situation

So you support the Constitution when you use it to further your failed collectivist
agenda, but when you disagree with the Constitution it's an outdated document?
The 2nd Amendment says nothing about hunting.
Your arguments are very weak.

[BSB]

Anybody who doesn't realize this is an assault rifle needs to go through the Army's AIT Infantry School. Maybe then they'll get an idea of what this rifle was built to do, auto capable or not. Jesus, you guys are living in a state of denial.


BSB

[sirs]

...and anyone that wants to keep calling a semiautomatic non-assault rifle, an assault rifle, needs to seriously take those ideological anti-gun blinders off.  I realize you have emotion on your side, and can play up how "evil it looks".  That still doesn't make it an assault rifle.  It requires that it be able to fire in automatic mode.  Simple as that

[BSB]

Man, you don't know shit about weapons do you. It has zero to do with looks. I haven't said a word about its looks. It's what it can do. I carried this very rifle in combat. I kept it on semi-auto just like this weapon. It is designed to kill people, lots of people, in a combat environment. That is the problem, not its looks.  You just don't know anything, Sirs, that's your problem.


BSB

[sirs]

I may not be a soldier, I do know the difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic weapon, and the diference between an assault rifle and one that isn't. 

Here's a hint, the Bushmaster may look mean and menacing, but until it can be fired in automatic mode, it's NOT an assault rifle.  It's the functional component that makes it one or not one, not how evil it looks, or how well a soldier can use one

Again, I recommend that you don't go spreading around how you can illegally turn a legal semi-automatic weapon, into an illegal automatic one.  Best keep that to yourself

[Plane]

I appologise.

WTF?
Dude don't be such a wussy.

No it is a fact.
I intended to discuss this at a low tempreture and maximum rationality.
Before I made this comment , I waited , but not long enough.
I saw one of the hosts on Fox news refuse to discuss the subject , untill the funerals are over .

I am chasened , that would have been a good idea.

I tryed, but in fact failed .


I still think there is a rational discussion to be had and I want to be a rational participant.
The emotional argument is akin to rolling dice , no telling what the result will be.
Effective solutions are not likely to be found that way.

[sirs]

We can still have that rational discussion, be it here, or in the thread Let's have that gun conversation, but it's hard, when folks want to imply the 2nd amendment is an outdated reference to hunters, or that an assault rifle is an assault rifle if a soldier knows how to use it like one.  Hell, with those parameters, a Winchester could be referred to as an assault rifle in the hands of a well trained soldier, since its apparently about "what it can do"

I remain hopeful that the discussion will indeed return to the rational, but I won't hold my breath

[BSB]

Sirs, I already said that looks don't play any part in my stating that the Bushmasters shown on this thread are in fact assault rifles. Yet, you keep bringing it up. Secondly, I never stated how to change one of these Bushmasters into a fully automatic weapon. That they can be is common knowledge, and frankly that you don't know that it's common knowledge is just another example of how limited your experience with, and understanding of, firearms is.

I'm not going to bother posting to you anymore.  No one with a dollop of self-respect would post the way you do. And it's always a big mistake to get tangled up with people who have no self-respect.


BSB

[Plane]

In terms of the ban on assault wepons , the bushmaster either is or is not depending on what accessorys are on it.

With a montecarlo stock leagal.

Add a folding stock , or a pistol grip, or a grenade cup or a flash hider or a bayonet lug, choose one .
And it becomes illeagal.

Conversion to full auto was and is illeagal without the assault wepons ban, that is from previous legislation.

There is a good reason not to reinstate the assault wepon ban, no one can point to any success it ever had during the years it was in force.

[sirs]

Sirs, I already said that looks don't play any part in my stating that the Bushmasters shown on this thread are in fact assault rifles. Yet, you keep bringing it up. Secondly, I never stated how to change one of these Bushmasters into a fully automatic weapon. That they can be is common knowledge, and frankly that you don't know that it's common knowledge is just another example of how limited your experience with, and understanding of, firearms is.

No, what you've said, that in the hands of a soldier, even a semi-automatic weapon can be very deadly.  Basically spouting points not in contention.  That soldiers often prefer the semi-automatic mode vs the automatic mode.  Again, not in debate. 

The issue is what MAKES an assault rifle a military assault weapon, NOT how a weapon can be used, or how well it can kill.  What MAKES an assault weapon an assault rifle is the functional ability to fire in automatic mode.  Without it, it's not an assault rifle.  Period, end of sentence.  Again, under your parameters of what it can do, an old west lever action Henry rifle would be an assault rifle, in the hands of a soldier who could use it

Hunting rifles can fire pretty much as fast, and with higher velocity.  In fact, the internal mechanisms of firing a bullet from a standard clip fed hunting rifle are pretty damn similar to this Bushmaster.  The only real difference........its LOOKS.  It LOOKS like something the military would use.   The reason military do use it is because its lighter, with less recoil, using a smaller bullet, with a lower velocity, than most hunting rifles.  Not to mention they can legally feed it larger than 10 round magazines, and their version DOES have the option to fire in automatic mode, making it a true assault rifle....that hunting rifles can not

And yea, you did claim if you knew what you were doing, you could alter a legal semi automatic weapon into an illegal fully automatic one....in just a few minutes. If you don't know what your doing, I guess that gets you off the hook.  If you do.....well, my recommendation is again to keep that to yourself. 


So much for the notion that I have some feeble understanding of firearms.  Shot down on the CCW issue, and now here....pun intended

[sirs]

Secondly, I never stated how to change one of these Bushmasters into a fully automatic weapon.

ooops, hand got caught in the cookie jar.  True, you didn't say how, only that you could, which is what I've been referencing all along.  Best keep that information to yourself

[sirs]

It does not look like somethoing particularly designed to shoot deer.

As has been already explained, that's not its purpose, to shoot deer.  A semi-automatic's primary purpose, especially that of the Bushmaster, is one of self defense

[BSB]

"the bushmaster either is or is not depending on what accessories are on it"

Rubbish. I'm not talking about some political definition of an assault rifle, or some asinine law allowing a bayonet lug or not. I'm talking about THE WEAPON AND WHAT IT CAN DO.  WAKE UP, THIS IS A COMBAT RIFLE!

BSB

[Plane]

"the bushmaster either is or is not depending on what accessories are on it"

Rubbish. I'm not talking about some political definition of an assault rifle, or some asinine law allowing a bayonet lug or not. I'm talking about THE WEAPON AND WHAT IT CAN DO.  WAKE UP, THIS IS A COMBAT RIFLE!

BSB

I am in total agreement that the asaault wepon ban was poorly written so much so that assinine is an apt word for it.

YOU SHOULD WAKE UP!

The law that will be written by very emotional people who know little about the wepon will again be innefective and useless , as the assault wepon ban was before , did it even annoy criminals? There is no evidence of any kind that that law prevented any injurys of any kind.

The M-1 carbine was never included , but any wepon with folding stocks could have been .Ignorance isn't important if effectiveness is not one of the aims of the legislation.

With much shouting Politicians can harvest this public emotion whether they care or not , whether they know anything about the wepons or not.No import, the purpose is to get voted for and the ignorance of the public was depended on .

I would like to explore ideas that would make schools safer , I would like to discuss ideas that would have good effect on other environments and improve safety.

I am not convinced that any ban on wepons can accomplish this, one of the worst cases ,  of this sort,  in the world happened in a European Country with tougher law than we have , the perpetrator was willing to drive across Europe to obtain his wepon.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/24/13448753-norway-massacre-gunman-anders-breivik-declared-sane-gets-21-year-sentence?lite