OT: Ok, there really is nothing to see here. Except me making a fool of myself.

[Puke]

real? its highly euphamistic. its not a modernization of events, its a complete re-immagining of events for specific political goals. the analogies that are being made are completely irresponsible.

Brigham Young and Aaron Burr both wanted to carve out their own piece of empire, but no one points to them as shining examples of why the populous should be armed.

even pretending that events leading to the revolution are analogous to modern assault weapons issues and michigan millitia type organizations is absurd. I dont mind the debate, but I think people should qualify their arguements a bit better.

And its not that im for disarming the public, but i would prefer if that armed public was educated and responsible. unfortuneately, they are not.

sleeping through history, indeed...

[ April 22, 2004, 19:10: Message edited by: Puke ]

[mottlee]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
There were no such things as "assault weapons" (they had rifles and pistols, no automated fire arms whatsoever) and the "national guard" (militias, yes, but not even an army until after 1776 and the US declaration of independence) back in 1775...

This is true...what was the first "Assault weapon?"?????? a ROCK! do we pick them all up and drop them off at the local PD ?

[Fyron]

Well, "assault weapon" generally refers to a gun capable of putting more than a few rounds of lead into a target in a few seconds...

Originally posted by geoschmo:
ROFL, I didn't realize he thought it was serious. Guess you caught the thread before he changed the title.

I believe he changed the title as a direct result of my post.

[ April 22, 2004, 23:22: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[primitive]

LOL, I pushed a button there Puke

This fun little story has been wandering the net for years, and if you google for it you will find dozens of copies of it, mostly on pro gun sites showing the evils of gun control.

But there are more to this story. If you don't see any relevance to the US domestic scene of today, try to exhange Thomas Gage with Paul Bremner and Lexington with Fallujah.
Eerie isn't it !

[mottlee]

[quote]Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
[QB] Well, "assault weapon" generally refers to a gun capable of putting more than a few rounds of lead into a target in a few seconds...

Under that note a "Shot gun" would fit, a sling with a bag of B-B's! where will it stop?

[AMF]

Doesn't it also refer to firing continuous rounds with a single held-down trigger? Semi-auto would be a round per squeeze without the need to re-cock after each shot, and burst-auto would be multiple rounds per squeeze (usually 3, IIRC), right? So, a shotgun, which fires one shell full of multiple pellets, is still not auto (semi or otherwise). It might be single or double action, though, but that's different...IIRC...sorry...just babbling again...


[quote]Originally posted by mottlee:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
[QB] Well, "assault weapon" generally refers to a gun capable of putting more than a few rounds of lead into a target in a few seconds...

Under that note a "Shot gun" would fit, a sling with a bag of B-B's! where will it stop?

[Puke]

depends on where you are. some places, assault weapons are defined by the stock and grip. forgrips, pistolgrips, heat shields arround the barrel, thumbholes, stock of certain length, detachable magazine, POSITION of the detachable magazine, its all very convoluted and silly.

[mottlee]

Like I said, lets grab a lot of rocks and turn these weapons in after all that is where it will stop.

[PvK]

Ya, everyone could go do spring cleaning in their garages and turn everything in as a deadly weapon. "Well, this old spare tire could be used as an incendiary device..."

PvK