Originally Posted by Templar
Many of the "assault weapons" you seem to know so much about function exactly the same as a lot of hunting rifles. So how is it not about cosmetics for you? If they function the same, why are only cosmetic mods being labeled as criteria to ban something? You used the word "menacing," not me. But, how is this about me now? Please, stay focused and on topic. Also, how do the numbers "bear out" on the TYPE of gun used in violent attacks?
You're the one calling them "menacing" when they function exactly the same as many hunting rifles. Can you make a distinction between your definition of an "assault weapon" and any number of hunting rifles on the market?
FWIW, I don't have a "fetish" for them, I enjoy hunting. I've also handled many strictly military firearms in my days in service. I know the differences, but do you? Sure doesn't seem like it. If you could answer the questions, instead of attempting to redirect/insult me because you don't know, that'd be nice.
I never said there wasn't a problem with violence in this country. Please point out where I did. I sure do agree with that statement.
Could have been done just the same. The same damage can be done with a .22 caliber small game rifle. But because it doesn't have a collapsible stock or a pistol grip, it's not "menacing" enough for you?
Does this qualify as an "assault weapon" to you?
I'm sure you will agree that topics like this one seem to elicit strong opinions and strong emotions on both sides. Frankly I was feeling ganged up on a bit so that may have been reflected in some of my responses. My intent was not to insult you or anyone else here and I apologize if I did.
That said, I've stated plainly I'm not a gun enthusiast. I don't own a gun and have no interest in owning guns. That doesn't disqualify me from this debate nor does it make my opinions less valuable. I feel very strongly about my opinions as i know you do. I'm prepared to have a respectful discussion and debate. Don't insult me and I won't insult you.
I notice the guns guys seem to be really focused on terminology, particularly the term "assault rifle". Keep in mind, I didn't create the term. That is the term being used in the current dialogue about guns and gun regulation in the US. What matters is how the law makers define the term "assault rifle". Any resulting gun legislation will be based on their definition, not mine.
Since you guys are so exorcised about the term maybe it's more pertinent to know how YOU define the term "assault rifle"?