^^^This. A waste of band width.JFC, I made the mistake of coming back to this thread this morning. What a cluster foxtrot. My head hurts.
They want to ban them all no matter what they call them. End of discussion.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's just common sense after all.^^^This. A waste of band width.
It's another useless "next worst thing" argument. As soon as they ban the "worst thing", the next to the worst thing becomes the worst thing.
Lol, can we get it out of this thread?The good news is that we got it out of the other thread...
Easier said than done...Lol, can we get it out of this thread?
Who's the OP again?OP seems to ignore countless suggestions to take his case to those who can do something about it: MD GA and VA legislature.
Pissing and moaning and stirring up sh!t here is more than a waste of time. I have some doubts regarding his bona fides in that regard.
Also particularly voluble, putting even Fabrizio in the shade. Is he a lawyer? Is his particular issue not so much resolving a question, as tying us up in pointless argument over pointless topic that is not ours to resolve in the first place?
It's an election year, and the GA is in session. That is traditionally troll season. Perhaps it's understandable that I have suspicions?
The OP of this thread was E. Shell, he is not the one responsible for this sh*t show. He merely started this thread to get all of the assault weapon thread derail BS out of the other thread.OP seems to ignore countless suggestions to take his case to those who can do something about it: MD GA and VA legislature.
Pissing and moaning and stirring up sh!t here is more than a waste of time. I have some doubts regarding his bona fides in that regard.
Also particularly voluble, putting even Fabrizio in the shade. Is he a lawyer? Is his particular issue not so much resolving a question, as tying us up in pointless argument over pointless topic that is not ours to resolve in the first place?
It's an election year, and the GA is in session. That is traditionally troll season. Perhaps it's understandable that I have suspicions?
Thank you for that Sir.The good news is that we got it out of the other thread...
My mistake!Who's the OP again?
Got it; again, apologies.The OP of this thread was E. Shell, he is not the one responsible for this sh*t show. He merely started this thread to get all of the assault weapon thread derail BS out of the other thread.
Not calling you out Bob. This thread was hijacked long ago. What Ed did was genius. He moved the hijack over here where it does little harm. Kudos to Ed. Like you Bob, we have grown weary of this thread and mainly return to it in the hopes of seeing a final consensus. No f**king chance though.My mistake!
Big apologies to @Ed Shell; i's MattFinals718 who turned this into a morass of excess verbiage.
Thanks, B, for calling me out.
Not calling you out Bob. This thread was hijacked long ago. What Ed did was genius. He moved the hijack over here where it does little harm. Kudos to Ed. Like you Bob, we have grown weary of this thread and mainly return to it in the hopes of seeing a final consensus. No f**king chance though.
Anyway: Are you still going to tell me that it's "subjective" that my Glock 34 does not shoot as quickly or as controllably as my Steyr SPP?
If you seriously believe that, you are beyond delusional. You must also partake in magical thinking on a regular basis.
Got it; again, apologies.
Trainwrecks all around, and I didn't help.
Got it; again, apologies.
Trainwrecks all around, and I didn't help.
We already had a definitive answerTo be a true assault weapon...the firearm must meet five specific criteria...
1) It must be a Carbine;
2) It must fire an intermediate round;
3) It must fire from a locked breech;
4) It must have a detachable magazine;
5) It must be select-fire.
I'll tell you what, when we no longer have to fight the anti's over the legal definition, then we can discuss the practical differences, until then, I and others will continue to argue the legal definition.
I do agree with you on your "constitutional argument" comment about military firearms being the most protected, but again, we have to fight the legal definition game. Until we can get the courts to agree to the actual legal rulings in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen, we will continue to fight that battle as well.
Matt, I gotta tell you, I have seen the light. Your powers of argument are just too overwhelming.
You should go to Annapolis or DC and enact your plan immediately.
You're guilty of being lazy. It's audio- if you believe in the argument you're trying to make, LISTEN to the Oral arguments for Bianchi and the HQL lawsuit.
Know your opponent.
^^^This. A waste of band width.
It's another useless "next worst thing" argument. As soon as they ban the "worst thing", the next to the worst thing becomes the worst thing.
EDIT: It wasn't the OP; I was referring to MattFinals718, who seemed to me to have taken over the thread, at least in my mind. Apologies for my failure to backtrack. . . . [He] seems to ignore countless suggestions to take his case to those who can do something about it: MD GA and VA legislature.
Pissing and moaning and stirring up sh!t here is more than a waste of time. I have some doubts regarding his bona fides in that regard.
Also particularly voluble, putting even Fabrizio in the shade. Is he a lawyer? Is his particular issue not so much resolving a question, as tying us up in pointless argument over pointless topic that is not ours to resolve in the first place?
It's an election year, and the GA is in session. That is traditionally troll season. Perhaps it's understandable that I have suspicions?
Yes ! It absolutely is .
9mm ( from full size pistol ) has only modest recoil.
Balance and ergonomic properties are more operative factors than marginal recoil dampening from the weight .
Not to pick on specifically G34 and SPP . Would apply across the respective category of each class .
In it's Era ( of over 100 years ) , the Brown Bess was world class , state of the art military arm .
In this case, BOTH of the recent Oral Arguments in Richmond are worth listening to- in their entirety. Neither has a single "aHa" moment. (Bianchi and HQL)Yes, I'm being (somewhat) lazy. That doesn't mean that I'm in the wrong.
Historical ignorance. The Brown Bess was designed and deployed as an ASSAULT weapon (minus rifling).Cool, but the Brown Bess is not a belt-fed machine gun. Machine guns were designed (at the outset) to lay down a high volume of fire against many targets, while the Brown Bess was not. Isn't that pretty intuitive?