I guess I should keep a close watch on mine.

Come to think of it, I came home the other day and made a terrifying discovery. My assault rifle had loaded itself and was crawling out the door in the direction of the local playground. That thing just ain't right, I tell ya.....

I guess all those trips to the range to practice 100 yard target shooting taught him nothing. I have failed as a gun owner. Then again, maybe it's not his fault. He only exists to kill quickly and effectively, after all.

My "assault rifles" contribute as much to gun crime as my dick contributes to rape. Spare me.

Are they sincere? Maybe not. Gun control is a wedge issue.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1012837

Democraticly controlled House (which had been controlled for 40 years) shifted to the Republicans.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1012837

The 1994 election also resulted in Bush II beating Ann Richards so that he became the Texas governor as a step towards the presidency.

OK, superpatriotman, why do you want to resurrect this 1994 issue?

Do you think that it is a winning issue for Democratic candididates? And do you think that it is not a wedge issue to separate some DU posters from gun-owning Democratic DU posters, other gun-owning Democrats, and gun-owning independents?

If you wanted to find a better wedge issue to help Republican candidates, what would it be?

How many people do we lose a year due to these WMDs?

to protect safety rather than standing around ineffectively in airports.

As a result of the Colorado massacre, some cities are planning to expand upon NY's stop-and-frisk activities by directing police to stop-and-grope people without any reasonable basis for suspecting that they have engaged in wrongful activities.

Colorado Massacre to Justify Upcoming Stop-and-Frisk Practice in San Francisco (Plus Other Cities)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1010444

There is an upward trend and according to the New York Civil Liberties Union with respect to New York alone,

After all, the right to safety is probably our most important right of all.

Aren't you the same relatively recent poster who claimed that with respect to the rifle used in the Colorado shooting:

I needz youz skilzz LOL

and objected to my calling him stupid.

Also, what in the hell could you find wrong with my reply about the Reagan gun ban? I remember the ban very well. Maybe you weren't old enough to remember it.

You know, where we respect civil rights? Freeperville is down the hall and to the right, I think you'll be more comfortable there.

I'm pretty sure you/they meant "Assault Weapons". There are explicit legislative terminologies dealing with each, and an Assault Rifle is categorically NOT an Assault Weapon.

B) Acording to the DOJ, long guns (like Assault Rifles, AR15, AK, Shotguns, etc...) contribute less than 25% to the total gun homicides. Handguns (not "Assault Rifles&quot account for most homicides. In fact, non-firearm weapons account for MORE homicide than long-guns.

Source: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/tables/weaponstab.cfm

I'm still sort of fighting the "assault rifles have a selective fire setting," but even Gallup asked an assult weapon question and called them "assault rifles."

I was a translator. At one point on a discussion board a newbie asked if "The soldier kicked open the door and lurched into the room, firing a spray of rounds from his assault weapon" was right.

"?" was the response. "Give us the Russian original." Mere stylistic badness aside, we finally got him to not say "spray of rounds," what his question was. We couldn't just get him to say "spraying the room with his ..." whatever.

The biggie was that "whatever," in Russian "avtomat", which looks like "automatic" because it means "some sort of automatic machine." Vending machine, slot machine, gas pump. One push or action and the machine's busy for a while--getting you soda and change, lights and little fruits moving in a window and maybe a bunch of coins spit out at you, numbers moving as gasoline gushes into your gas tank. For a gun, it's a tommy gun, machine gun, submachine gun, assault rifle--by context, AK-47, M16, Ouzi. Pull trigger and rat-a-tat-tat-tat-tat as the mechanism chucks out a casing and grabs and positions another bullet, firing it at once. Rinse and repeat.

He insisted on "assault weapon." It was trendy, he heard the word, and wasn't it just a machine gun anyway? He found a bad-ass assault weapon picture and said it *looked* like a submachine gun. We never convinced him. At the end he had the hapless Russian soldier lurching into a room full of German troops and firing a spray of bullets from his assault weapon. Squeeze-bang, squeeze-bang, squeeze-bang. Then again, he also had an assault weapon mounted to a train, and "assault weapon nests". In his version of the novel there's no way the Russians retook Stalingrad. They probably managed a truce somewhere near Vladivostok to discuss surrender terms.

A paid professional language-wrangler got it wrong, and insisted on being wrong. What's the hope for non-professional non-language-wranglers?

Please don't make the cause of gun control appear trivial with this sort of argument.

Nuclear arms are, incendiary bombs dropped on dense populations are, poison gasses are, hand-held firearms are not. With the A-Bomb someone pulls the trigger once and millions die, with an assult rifle you pull the trigger once and maybe you kill one person, maybe not. That is the difference between a weapon and a weapon of mass destruction.

Yes, very carefully worded, because if should say "We lose about 350 people a year to rifles"

and about 800 to hands and feet, does that make them WMD's also?

Knives kill about 1,800 so they are about 5 times as dangerous as "assault weapons".... Knife BAN!!!

but you're right, ban knives, it would be about as effective as banning firearms, though it will make dinner a bit more difficult for those of us with few teeth left.

Some are weapons of moderate destruction.

Yet others are weapons of mild destruction or of moderate distress.

Less than 400 to rifles if I recall correctly.

That includes ALL types of rifles, even so called "assault weapons".

Hands and feet are used more often to kill.

Compare that to Japan, a country of 127 million, which has 47 gun-related deaths in the most recent statistical year, mostly among yakuza gang members

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms

But the thread is specifically about "assault weapons"

Most U.S. homicides are committed with handguns.

Zero. Zip Zilch.

Rifles (assault and otherwise) account for about 3% of homicide deaths per year.

Shotguns account for about 11%, IIRC.

Handguns for about half, and the balance is "other"; knives and clubs and feet and fists.


That means that of the 44 people murdered per day, on average, in the USA, a rifle will account for about 1 of them.

Knife homicides outstrip all rifle homicides* 5-to-1 in the US, per annum.


Pic related: it's a deadly WMD.

*That's ALL rifles, not just military-style semi autos (to say nothing of what are actually assault rifles: selective-fire real military weapons).

with their ergonomic grips, black finish, rapid-removal sheaths, assault serrations and perhaps even a bayonet feature.

Those were NOT the knives our founding fathers knew!

by being so restricted as to be nearly impossible to acquire and the deaths due to assault rifles are practically zero.

I understand they have somewhat restrictive gun laws, but at least it's been effective at curbing gun violence.