Active shooter in Texas high school

[kwerk]

I'll answer this as an average gun owning American - I don't care what the "vast majority" of Americans think (i.e. women and college students) because it's not mob rule. It's not a democracy it's a REPUBLIC with a bill of rights like I keep saying.

As for full auto I don't really have a problem with jumping through hoops for that. I don't think the lack of full auto would hinder self-defense or a defensive insurrection, which let's face it would simply be the mass assassination of "tyrants", their families, politicians, journalists and so forth. Not saying assassinating unarmed enemies is OK by any means but it's typically how things pan out. Look at the Mexican cartels who essentially run 1/2 of that country now for example (using guns smuggled from AMERICA!). Military M16's don't even have full auto they have 3 round burst. The police use the same semi-auto AR15s as civilians. The military can get away with indiscriminately spraying areas by chalking up civilian deaths to collateral damage but individuals and police are accountable for every single press of the trigger.

1. How many people were MURDERED by a vehicle in the UK? That’s the comparison I made.

2. Driving tests and requirements to get a drivers licence have been made successively stricter over the years in the UK and deaths overall by vehicles has been on a continuous downward trend for decades (not just because of changes to driving tests). But you’re right, that’s a perfectly reasonable argument to make, and it’s one of the aims of autonomous vehicles, removing the person from the drivers seat to make the roads safer.

And I’m sorry, what’s sanctimonious about pointing out that the vast majority of Americans have a differing opinion to you.

Out of interest, presumably you’re for the complete de restriction of all guns in the US then? Fully automatic weapons for anyone that wants them? If not then why not?

Edit:



Can you point to me where in the second amendment it sets out a clause against criminals having a right to bear arms? Or are you setting out your own restriction on the second amendment? That leads on from the previous question and suggests your argument about complete freedom and liberty is rot and in fact we are arguing shades of grey, with the particular shade being the sticking point.

 

[kwerk]

The bulk of America is all on the same wavelength outside the big cities and college towns. Go to any small midwest town and it's all just go to work, go to walmart, go to church, support the military, blow off steam in your free time with sports/guns/trucks/DIY/beer/prostitutes/whatever and otherwise minding your own business and be left alone. It's almost comical how aligned American men are. Work/sports/beer/lifting/guns/trucks/flags the end.

I was actually watching Drugs Inc on Netflix today and a Pittsburgh SWAT team was driving out in the armored car to do a drug raid and they were all in the back holding hands and saying a prayer. It was quite weird to watch as someone who didn't grow up here and go to church.

Although you're right there is a bit of friction between different groups and agencies but nothing fundamental. Perhaps something between evangelical type christians and normal people but that's all I can think of.

The US is an absolute mess for any kind of domestic conflict - so many ex-military within the population, lots of hardware, etc. the state of Texas alone just using the 70-80s era military hardware it has in reserve could probably take on a couple of mid-sized European countries, etc. then you have the massive fragmentation within law enforcement - with some SWAT like organisations that are semi-autonomous and heavily armed and the division between federal/national and state level entities, etc.

(This post is meant in general not saying who would side with who, etc.).

 

[Amp34]

I'll answer this as an average gun owning American - I don't care what the "vast majority" of Americans think (i.e. women and college students) because it's not mob rule. It's not a democracy it's a REPUBLIC with a bill of rights like I keep saying.

Are you the American equivalent of the Freeman on the land?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

The US is a democracy, hence elections every couple of years for representatives, senators and Presidents. Public opinion matters.

As for full auto I don't really have a problem with jumping through hoops for that. I don't think the lack of full auto would hinder self-defense or a defensive insurrection, which let's face it would simply be the mass assassination of "tyrants", their families, politicians, journalists and so forth. Not saying assassinating unarmed enemies is OK by any means but it's typically how things pan out. Look at the Mexican cartels who essentially run 1/2 of that country now for example (using guns smuggled from AMERICA!). Military M16's don't even have full auto they have 3 round burst. The police use the same semi-auto AR15s as civilians. The military can get away with indiscriminately spraying areas by chalking up civilian deaths to collateral damage but individuals and police are accountable for every single press of the trigger.

So you think anyone should be able to access a fully automatic weapon then? Or will the hoops preclude some from gaining access (they will, or else there is no point in having them)? If the latter then why can the same argument not be used for most other firearms? We have already clarified that the Second Amendment does not mean everyone has access to any firearm they want, the public in general aren't allowed by law to own some firearms at all, some people by law aren't allowed any type of firearm, and different states also have different restrictions on and requirements for all firearms. My main argument is largely based around safety (storage and carrying of firearms) and consistency in the regulatory regime. Joined up databases and more rigorous checks and closing of loopholes, along with the restriction of certain accessories.*

And yes, it's almost certain military M16's will have full auto, most other assault rifles do (the Canadian equivelant, the C7 does, as does the British SA80). There are normally three options, semi Auto, Burst and Full Auto.

*I always thought there was no real need for silencers for example, but talking to someone at a range the other day they had a good point. For hearing protection at indoor ranges they are actually quite useful.

 

[Rroff]

And yes, it's almost certain military M16's will have full auto, most other assault rifles do (the Canadian equivelant, the C7 does, as does the British SA80). There are normally three options, semi Auto, Burst and Full Auto.

There was a time IIRC when M16 army issue were burst mode only but I'm pretty sure current assault rifles in the US military are capable of full auto.

EDIT: Looks like its a fairly complicated story and in most cases full auto was an option - there have been times when some units of national guard and/or other reserve type units that were issued M16s capable of burst fire with automatic fire "un-selectable" and a period early on in Vietnam where some were issued without automatic fire due to teething issues causing jamming from the dirt build up when a lot of rounds were cycled through them.

 

[dowie]

And yes, it's almost certain military M16's will have full auto, most other assault rifles do (the Canadian equivelant, the C7 does, as does the British SA80). There are normally three options, semi Auto, Burst and Full Auto.

You've been playing too many video games - of the rifles you've mentioned it is actually the M16 that will have burst mode in some variants and that is instead of being fully automatic - so it isn't "certain military M16s will have full auto" and there are (for the riles mentioned) only two options.

 

[Amp34]

There was a time IIRC when M16 army issue were burst mode only but I'm pretty sure current assault rifles in the US military are capable of full auto.

EDIT: Looks like its a fairly complicated story and in most cases full auto was an option - there have been times when some units of national guard and/or other reserve type units that were issued M16s capable of burst fire with automatic fire "un-selectable" and a period early on in Vietnam where some were issued without automatic fire due to teething issues causing jamming from the dirt build up when a lot of rounds were cycled through them.

Yeah, you’re right. I was just coming back to edit my post. It’s a lot more complex, although a little odd considering most other western militaries have assault rifles with full auto, even if it’s rarely used.

It seems the current standard issue A2 does not have full auto, but the A3 variant, apparently used by the navy does.

 

[dowie]

Yeah, you’re right. I was just coming back to edit my post. It’s a lot more complex, although a little odd considering most other western militaries have assault rifles with full auto, even if it’s rarely used.

it isn't that complicated, there isn't much use for full auto - in some of the situations where it is used it is essentially to fire bursts anyway... perhaps the one situation is clearing a trench or bunker where the SOP is (or at least was 10 years ago) to empty half a magazine. In OBUA bursts can be fired, in ambushes you'll typically have every other guy firing bursts vs semi auto and in top cover shoots you'll fire bursts(or just fire a bunch of rounds on semi auto in quick succession)... so basically although the British army's standard issue rifle can fire fully automatic the few times you'll actually switch to using that mode you'll only be briefly squeezing the trigger to fire bursts anyway.

 

[Amp34]

it isn't that complicated, there isn't much use for full auto - in some of the situations where it is used it is essentially to fire bursts anyway... perhaps the one situation is clearing a trench or bunker where the SOP is (or at least was 10 years ago) to empty half a magazine. In OBUA bursts can be fired, in ambushes you'll typically have every other guy firing bursts vs semi auto and in top cover shoots you'll fire bursts(or just fire a bunch of rounds on semi auto in quick succession)... so basically although the British army's standard issue rifle can fire fully automatic the few times you'll actually switch to using that mode you'll only be briefly squeezing the trigger to fire bursts anyway.

Yes, it’s not used much at all, but a bit odd it’s not available on some but is on others considering the extra maintenance/manufacturing required for the full auto option is likely to be minimal AND in some cases it can be useful. I guess from a design perspective the US military buy enough that they can have several essentially identical weapons for specific units. (That said, presumably there are other variances between the A2 and 3 if one is navy specific. I don’t know enough about US military weapons to comment, hence my “almost certain” comment earlier, rather than “do”).

 

[dowie]

Yes, it’s not used much at all, but a bit odd it’s not available on some but is on others considering the extra maintenance/manufacturing required for the full auto option is likely to be minimal AND in some cases it can be useful. I guess from a design perspective the US military buy enough that they can have several essentially identical weapons for specific units. (That said, presumably there are other variances between the A2 and 3 if one is navy specific).

it is just a limitation they have with the existing design - on the M16 they have three settings - you can switch between "safe", "semi auto" and then there is room for one one other - that can be either full auto or burst depending on the variant, so basically if you want one you can't have the other

 

[Amp34]

it is just a limitation they have with the existing design - on the M16 they have three settings - you can switch between "safe", "semi auto" and then there is room for one one other - that can be either full auto or burst depending on the variant, so basically if you want one you can't have the other

Ah, makes more sense. And it appears the A3 variant is full auto with no burst.

 

[Rroff]

As much as I'm relatively pro-gun I think that is about as far as we probably should take this thread on a discussion of the M16 given the topic.

 

[kwerk]

Show me where in the constitution the word "democracy" or "democratic" shows up. it's not mentioned once. It's a republic.

Semi-autos, body armor, night vision and suppressors should be unrestricted. If you're a violent criminal you should be in prison. Full auto are gravy, hobby guns. Like I said you're responsible for where every bullet ends up which is pretty much impossible with full auto. So some type of competency test or time consuming application that only a true hobbiest would bother with seems reasonable. The 2A doesn't mention hunting or hobbies. The military dumped full auto M16s because it was shown to be a large waste of ammo, overheats the gun and is basically uncontrollable/useless for targeted firing. They found the average infantryman or marine had no use for it but kept it for carbines used in the jungle, vehicles, special operations, etc.

Are you the American equivalent of the Freeman on the land?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

The US is a democracy, hence elections every couple of years for representatives, senators and Presidents. Public opinion matters.



So you think anyone should be able to access a fully automatic weapon then? Or will the hoops preclude some from gaining access (they will, or else there is no point in having them)? If the latter then why can the same argument not be used for most other firearms? We have already clarified that the Second Amendment does not mean everyone has access to any firearm they want, the public in general aren't allowed by law to own some firearms at all, some people by law aren't allowed any type of firearm, and different states also have different restrictions on and requirements for all firearms. My main argument is largely based around safety (storage and carrying of firearms) and consistency in the regulatory regime. Joined up databases and more rigorous checks and closing of loopholes, along with the restriction of certain accessories.*

And yes, it's almost certain military M16's will have full auto, most other assault rifles do (the Canadian equivelant, the C7 does, as does the British SA80). There are normally three options, semi Auto, Burst and Full Auto.

*I always thought there was no real need for silencers for example, but talking to someone at a range the other day they had a good point. For hearing protection at indoor ranges they are actually quite useful.

 

[kwerk]

“Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths -Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would at the same time be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.”

James Madison

https://thefederalistpapers.org/fed...-been-spectacles-of-turbulence-and-contention

 

[Rilot]

The military dumped full auto M16s

They did not. All standard army issue M16s and M4s are selective fire with full auto, 3 round burst, or single shot modes.

 

[kwerk]

This was already gone over above. The Army and Marines get M16A2s or M16A4s neither of which have full auto.

They did not. All standard army issue M16s and M4s are selective fire with full auto, 3 round burst, or single shot modes.

 

[Rilot]

Fair enough. I did not know that.

 

[Amp34]

Show me where in the constitution the word "democracy" or "democratic" shows up. it's not mentioned once. It's a republic.

Semi-autos, body armor, night vision and suppressors should be unrestricted. If you're a violent criminal you should be in prison. Full auto are gravy, hobby guns. Like I said you're responsible for where every bullet ends up which is pretty much impossible with full auto. So some type of competency test or time consuming application that only a true hobbiest would bother with seems reasonable. The 2A doesn't mention hunting or hobbies. The military dumped full auto M16s because it was shown to be a large waste of ammo, overheats the gun and is basically uncontrollable/useless for targeted firing. They found the average infantryman or marine had no use for it but kept it for carbines used in the jungle, vehicles, special operations, etc.

So presumably then you’d be happy elections were cancelled? It’s not a democracy afterall.

Worth reading:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...mocracy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.46c126b8658e

And a nice twisting of logic there. Because fully automatic isn’t available on some standard issue US assault rifles they’re obviously not for military use and therefore only for hobby and fun, so obviously not covered by the amendment (not the original constitution I may add).

Out of interest by that definition I presume you’re ok with people having free access to M2H3 .50 machine gun, or the M249 light machine gun. Both are currently standard issue US weapons and would be very useful for the militias discussed in the second amendment.

Face it, you’re putting restrictions on the ownership of firearms based on how you want to interpret the amendment, which is exactly what most others want to do. The shade of gray is just different.

 

[dowie]

Show me where in the constitution the word "democracy" or "democratic" shows up. it's not mentioned once. It's a republic.

Why does it need to be in the constitution?

I think I already corrected this nonsense once before in this thread but just too recap, you don't appear to understand what those terms mean nor do you realise that they mutually exclusive.

For example North Korea is a republic but not a democracy (despite what they might try and claim). Saudi Arabia is a monarchy and not a democracy.

The UK is a monarchy and a democracy. The US is a republic and a democracy.

Being a republic instead of a monarchy has nothing to do with whether or not a country is a democracy. Seem republics are democratic some aren't. Some monarchy are democratic some aren't.

 

[Sankari]

The USA is a democratic constitutional republic, not a democracy. The founding fathers were bitterly opposed to democracy (particularly direct democracy) because they believed a nation should be governed by the privileged, and not by the common people. This is why voting rights were heavily restricted until the 1820s. Up to that point, most white men were not allowed to vote.

In news more relevant to this thread:

 

[adolf hamster]

In news more relevant to this thread:

tbh aside from canada i wouldn't be surprised if you could include the whole commonwealth and a decent chunk of europe in there.

and it says a lot that the one country i could think to exclude happens to be the one right next to america with (relatively) unrestricted gun laws.