slug.com slug.com

8 7

Kamala Harris: ‘We Should Have an Assault Weapons Ban’

[infowars.com]

RealAlexJones 8 Apr 25
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

8 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

There already is a law on the books, its called the National Fire Arms act, which was enacted in 1934. There have been amendments, Title 2 added in 1968, and then again again in a limited fashion and allowed to run out its time limits without being renewed because it was not effective. The NFA. The original purpose was to control “gangland” violence using fully automatic guns and explosives from the WW1 And WW2 wars (military grade) that were not regulated. The so-called assault weapons are NOT military grade weapons, and trying to “shoehorn” them into that class is problematic and un-constitutional, not that that has ever stopped a gun hater......

1

What an uninformed idiot, embarassing that she is the US vice president.

It is even worse than that. We already tried such a ban and it lasted for 10 years. It was allowed to "expire" as no one could show that it had any effect on crime, shootings, whatever. Totally useless -- an example of liberal theater. Of course, you are not allowed to bring that up, sorta like bringing up her deliberate action as Ca AttGen in hiding data that would have exonerated blacks sent to prison, and BeijingBiden's action as senator in pushing a law that imprisoned tens of thousands of young blacks for no bloody reason -- except he didn't like blacks. Hilary's statement seems to be new rule: "At this point what does it matter?!".

1

What we need is a lefty politician ban.

0

Except for her, of course

3

Once one right gone. Nothing to stop rest going

4

CAMALAss would not know the difference between an assault weapon and a deer rifle!!!
Funny thing is a WWI or WWII assault weapon is NOW a deer rifle!!!
What will become of today's assault weapons?????

Except no assault weapon has ever been a hunting rifle. (Assault weapons by definition are fully automatic.)

@TrevL67 I know, and there are few states that even allow them legally!!! In those states you are required by Federal Law to have a "tax stamp" for each one, which means the Federal Government know who has, and where the legal ones are!!!
CAMALAss, probably doesn't even know that!!!

@TrevL67 Where did you come up with that definition? Please cite.

@Zeitgeist234 It is the FEDERAL LAW, I sell class three weapons and suppressors!!
I have to know what is required!!! If you have a Class three item and no tax stamp, I wish you the best!!!

@Zeitgeist234 , sorry for my simplified definition, I should have specified "select fire" capable but wanted to dummy it down as it is the auto fire mode that is/should be the only point of concern/discussion as semi-auto is common in all types of firearms.
Ref.
[dictionary.com]

@TrevL67 Exactly, FULL AUTO is "class three", you need a Federal tax stamp to legally have one!!!
That goes for suppressors also!!!

3

Au contrare, Kamala. We should have every householder and every young person physically capable of operating an assault weapon forced to train with, keep and be prepared to use a military issue assault weapon at a moment's notice. We need to get rid of the idiotic duty to retreat laws and institute national stand your ground and castle doctrine. We must assure that all persons issued such weapons are competent in their care and use, including safety. Then we will finally have that "Well regulated militia" written about in the Second Amendment.

We have to get terminology right, the term "assault rifle" only applies to specialized compact military fully-auto rifles) I don't think automatic weapons (true assault rifles) have any role in civil urban operations by police or civilians. The very purpose and nature of automatic fire is to suppress an enemy with area fire (lots of bullets in the vicinity of the enemy). Too dangerous for populated areas where there are innocent people all around. However AR15s and the likes are semi-auto sporting rifles well suited for urban defense, hunting, and sport-shooting.

@TrevL67 The purpose of the training and the equipment is not personal defense, but militia preparation. The Swiss issue each male in the country a military assault rifle and require them to be trained in the use of the weapon. Switzerland does not have a high rate of mass shootings because there are too many ready militia around to end the spree in a moment's notice. Every assault rifle issued to the United States military has a selector switch to chose between safe, semi and auto or burst fire. A well trained individual seldom if ever switches the weapon to autofire.

@FuzzyMarineVet , close but not exactly factual on Swiss government issued firearms. All Swiss able-bodied men must serve and all people with military service have the option of purchasing a firearm on releases (http://factmyth.com/factoids/switzerland-requires-citizens-to-own-guns/) so they are not under obligation to have or given a gun by the government although many do opt to buy their service gun.
I mostly agree with your perspective on select fire rifles but, given the very limited practical application of auto-fire, my years of experience in the military, and the danger of accidentally selecting auto in a rural self-defense scenario (which I have seen from even trained soldiers) I don't think any risk-benifit analysis could make sense for civilian use. Full auto is fun but very impractical.

@TrevL67 This is the primary reason that the automatic sear on the M16-A1s issued in the Marine Corps was removed unless the issuee was designated an automatic rifleman in his fire team. It didn't stop the rifle from firing full auto, but it made it so rapid that the one who made the mistake of selecting autofire was begging for ammo from his more careful squad mates.

@FuzzyMarineVet Yes, having to ask for ammo because you have poor fire discipline is a good teacher! 😁

5

Are not ALL weapons designed to 'assault'? I thought that by definition, that was the very thing that made an item a 'weapon' and not just a tool 🤔

Good point. But within the firearms industry, "assault weapon' is a technical term used to describe a light weight, selective fire, small caliber rifle or submachinegun designed for use by soldiers. What VP Harris and the rest of the crew get wrong, and hope most of their base are too stupid to look up, is that it's already illegal to buy any modern firearm capable of automatic fire or burst fire.

Assault is an action, firearms are a tool. Some are optimized for hunting, some for competition, some for "plinking" some for defense, and some for combat. Saying all firearms are for assault is like saying all autos are for basic transportation, race cars, trucks, limos are transport but are by no means good for that. An "assault rifle" is a purposely misused term to cloud the gun-control/gun-rights issue.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:215599
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.