ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

How to consider an Assault Weapon. Logic versus hysteria. These guys try to make it complicated by using cool terms and

Updated on June 19, 2013

Cactus hedges was used instead of barbed wire.

So in the southwest the early settlers used cactus barriers for protection and containment.
So in the southwest the early settlers used cactus barriers for protection and containment. | Source

Assault weapons and fun

There are in fact some things we just do for fun. The fun part is good for us no matter the activity. I am certain that many people have assault weapons because they are fun. And that should be acceptable as a reason to have one. Unless the downside is strong enough not to have something just for fun. Seems like assault weapons fit that bill.

Deadly Instruments we need.

In the early eighties I worked on a legal case involving a Ferrari, just like Magnum PI’s. A wealthy beautiful divorce’ in a town called La Jolla Ca. thought it would be a good idea as a man magnet. Indeed it would have been. She went into the dealership with her new wealth and without even a test drive she drove out with a brand new Ferrari. She never made it home just a mile away. She killed one pedestrian and herself going into 3rd at 100 miles per hour in about two minutes. She had no business driving that car. More importantly the dealer had no business selling it to her without appropriate precautions. I said too bad for the lady. But my pedestrians’ family depended on him for a living. Yes we held the dealership accountable. And new rules were put into place. Cars are deadly weapons. We insist on testing and practice before letting someone drive. How different should a gun be?

Utilitarian balancing act.

The difference in the two scenarios and the likeness make a case for assault weapons regulation. If we qualify we should all have a gun and a car to serve the purpose for which they are intended. And if we step up and get even better qualified we should all have a right to own a Maserati and an automatic pistol. But I cannot see the need or right to own a tank or a formula one.

Did you know that when I was a boy, you did not need to wear seat belts in vehicles? And likewise there was firearm training available through schools.

I fired my first weapon at 5 years old. I drove our farm truck at 12 years old. And I saw my first man die at 10 years old. I did not watch TV until about 8 years old. The only phone my family had was a party line, for some time. My dad was a health director, I went with him once to shut down a bar, the reason was that two hombres were sitting at the bar with pistols still strapped on. (to clarify – they were loaded – I think if they were empty it was ok) You see a real range cowboy carried a pistol for a reason.

I believe we have a right to firearms and we should have the right to not wear seat belts, helmets on motorcycles and that anything we grow ourselves should be legal. I believe the reason we have too many bullies is that we have too many sissies. I believe that restricting God or faith anywhere is sick and twisted – we don’t restrict the practice of atheism why religion?

This playground is closed until further notice

This is our local playground. It is closed. The cost of insuring it after Sandy Hook is too high for the County.
This is our local playground. It is closed. The cost of insuring it after Sandy Hook is too high for the County. | Source

Sometimes the best freedoms are ones not exercised.

I have a carry permit, lapsed of course because it is just silly. I am a lucky one, I made it through my youth. I am a lucky one, I never seriously have caused another serious harm. (that one guy with a glass eye is better for it today;-) I am lucky because people love me, which is not always easy.There are a lot of things I am free to do but chose not to.

Conclusion: Degrees

An assault weapon is one made for the particular purpose of rapid firing lethal projectiles in the direction of an entrenched enemy. This is meant to “pin” the opponent down. Militias are for protection and defense of property and people therein. Assault weapons are not meant to attack groups of people as no real interest is served in mass homicide. An assault weapon is not a defensive weapon. Assault weapons are to be employed in team operations. Without a team an assault weapon serves no purpose.

A mentally challenged person is on every mass transportation available. A mentally challenged person normally can lead an abundant life. But an emotionally challenged person can maybe drive a regular car and maybe handle a single shot pistol but please do not give them assault weapons and Maseratis.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Right on the money Carl. Your questions beg the question: Is there any appropriate legislation that could help?

      I really am a person who always questions if more government is right, even just making laws. But it seems they should do something in this regard. Stronger penalties is easy to suggest but that is not working.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      The problem with "limited disarmament" is that it would be limited to law abiding citizens who obey the law. Criminals would love more of it because they are not going to turn in their firearms and law abiding citizens will be easier to prey on. It always comes down to the same arguments. As for your statistics, how many violent crimes are committed per day that don't involve a gun and how many times a day is a gun used to stop a crime?

      There seems to be this great need for some people to pass some kind of legislation right now, but who would more legislation impact and what would it accomplish?

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      You make a very good point. But I think that most Americans are ready to forgo their right to mutually escalate, and begin the process of limited disarmament. I believe this is especially true in battlefields like LA and NYC. What are the statistics now? Something like a violent crime involving a gun every hour of every day?

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      "Now I think that you and Jack have made a perfect case that because I do not know what I am talking about I should not speak on the subject. Clearly then logic dictates that I should not be allowed to have one. I cannot imagine you would advocate someone like me to have the weapons.

      That would be a check and checkmate friend. No one could advocate me losing my freedom of speech, press and expression but want to advocate that I be armed."

      I'm all for you buying an AR-15. I think every law-abiding citizen should have one. Unfortunately, your state of California has banned you from buying one. I guess their heavy restrictions on firearms are why cities like Los Angeles are so safe and peaceful.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Carl, your statement is just plain false. But why it is false may be too subtle for you. I argue that certain deadly instruments should not be sold to certain individuals, it is not a restriction on what we own, but on people who should not own them.

      Now I think that you and Jack have made a perfect case that because I do not know what I am talking about I should not speak on the subject. Clearly then logic dictates that I should not be allowed to have one. I cannot imagine you would advocate someone like me to have the weapons.

      That would be a check and checkmate friend. No one could advocate me losing my freedom of speech, press and expression but want to advocate that I be armed.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      "This is a case on point, your rivalry toward me because I am not military trained, lessons your ability to look for commonality and cooperation but more toward "one upmanship" just as the Arms race did. That attitude is not helpful in a democracy, but rather polarizing."

      My problem with you is not your lack of military training. My problem with you is that you have no idea what you are talking about and are advocating more restrictions on what people should be allowed to own.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack, I think I just got an important concept that have us talking over each other. Is it possible that your terminology discussion is based on your belief that there is only one right terminology. And that perhaps civilian lay terminology is just as right?

      Could that be?

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Carl -- Just how did I insult the Construction Battalions. I think as you can see, even Jack accepted that I gave them honor.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Rivalry is good in competition Carl. And rivalry has some merit in Governance but usually not as in this discussion on what is best for the nation as a whole.

      This is a case on point, your rivalry toward me because I am not military trained, lessons your ability to look for commonality and cooperation but more toward "one upmanship" just as the Arms race did. That attitude is not helpful in a democracy, but rather polarizing.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack, that is a great explanation of the "culture" of Military.

      I think, "back to the point" You are not familiar enough with civil society terminology or function of democracy. Therefore, in spite of your earnest desires, you are marginally able to speak to the issues of firearms and society. By not being able to accept common lay people's vocabulary you do not have a credible voice and it is proper that I point that out. Especially to people who think you must be right because you were in the military.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      @ Jack

      I initially missed his last paragraph about insulting the Seabees. This dude is an absolute shitbird. I was stationed on a Navy facility during my first tour in the AF. I was assigned a detail to help out the Seabees for a while. All good guys.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      "Further more. Carl, I believe has never fire a weapon in combat. He claims special status, and the rank of someone to accept."

      No I haven't fired a weapon in combat. I'm thankful for that. If I had been in a position that it was necessary to fire on someone, I feel I would have. There is no glory in killing and your attempt to lessen my military accomplishments once again shows your ignorance.

      "There is also bigotry between services. And even battalions. But that also is not what I said. What I truly referenced and you have taken out of context is an attitude of superiority based on the use of acronyms."

      We call that rivalry. There is always trash talking between services and even between units. At the end of the day, we know we are all on the same team. You have no idea what you are talking about.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Yes, the Fighting Seabees. I played the part of John Wayne in the movie.

      And yes, that is what you said. And yes, I noted that if that is your opinion you know little about the military. And I hold my position.

      Qualifications and knowing the correct terminology almost always go hand in hand. The odds that someone who doesn't know the terminology is also qualified is slight. That is not bigotry. That is common sense.

      It's true that the military is arranged almost along a tribal basis. My little squad is my sub-tribe which I owe allegience to and don't want outsiders to interfere with. We are part of a larger sub-tribe known as a department, which is part of a larger sub-tribe known as a command. And so upwards to include all the military.

      It's like me and my brothers against our cousins. Me, my brother and our cousins against the neighborhood. Me, my brother, our cousins and the neighborhood against some other neighborhood. And us and all the neighborhoods against another foreign power.

      That is not the definition of bigotry. But I noted in a past post that you did have some problems with English, eh.

      But back to the point. YOU are not familiar with the terminology or functions of firearms. Therefore, in spite of your earnest desires, you are marginally able to speak to the issue of firearms and society. You certainly don't have a credible voice to speak with, and it is reasonable that those who recognize this point it out to those who don't.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I will double check but I am quite sure I at least meant that there was bigotry in the military based on familiarity with terminology. Not that lower ranks are bigoted. Lower echelon refers to the length of time in service and rank.

      There is also bigotry between services. And even battalions. But that also is not what I said. What I truly referenced and you have taken out of context is an attitude of superiority based on the use of acronyms.

      "" It is not your genius that makes them ineligible but rather your presumption that knowing more acronyms than someone else makes you smarter and more qualified. I must say I did see this bigotry in the very lower echelons of military. This issue is not strictly technical but societal"" That is what I said.

      By the way I am confused about service in the "Seabees" as I understand it that term came from the initials C & B, from Construction Battalion. Go Hueneme.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Actually, the majority of my time in the Navy was with the Seabees... but my service has nothing to do with your bogus claim of lower ranking military people being bigoted, does it.

      Just another sad effort to deflect from what you actually posted, eh.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Further more. Carl, I believe has never fire a weapon in combat. He claims special status, and the rank of someone to accept.

      Carl buddy bow out. respectfully.

      And Jack, your time in military was as a desk jockey with no Combat experience.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Excellent Carl. That is a fully true comment in the sense you mean it. Did you know that George Washington was not paid as a soldier. Jefferson was not a combat veteran. And as late as 50 years ago, Blacks were treated differently in the military. Did you know that Teddy Roosevelt actually was not ever in the US military. And that the folks responsible for ending the Pacific WWII war were immigrant civilians?

      Are you a combat veteran? No you are not. Do not try to play the old I am a vet I deserve attention, respect and security card. No honest real veteran I know would even mention what you do and are ashamed of you.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      Now you're trying to bring the My Lai Massacre into your pointless argument? I stand by my claim that the only way to fully understand the military is to serve in it. Everything in you last post was garbage and means nothing to me.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      No sir you are wrong about me. JAG civilian legal panels from 83 through 89. Security for San Diego private contractors for 32nd street naval facilities management, from 05 to 07.

      First I defended the rights of our men and women in service. Then I secured their local safety and safe guarded assets, from terrorism and theft.

      I have the weapon qualifications and familiarity of what I speak. Rank in the military bestows a higher status. In our civilian world that is not relevant at a gas station or football game.

      Carl the only way to understand the military is to serve it, NOT in it. Calling me sick and filth and that I make you sick. I hope is not a reflection of your time in service. But if it is I am sure your CO would be proud.

      Because a civilian does not roll over and bow to your weapons expertise when deciding matters of social justice and civil society, does not make them sick. Or was your CO Calley or Kerry? You see this is why you are unqualified to lead discussion in the matter. If I do not agree with you, you think I am filth. Grow up and join civil society.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      @ Eric

      I thought you were trying to be friendly and open a dialogue after your previous posts, but I was wrong. You dared to say that:

      "a person who spent most their life in the military is not the one I go to for expertise about what is right under the constitution and for civil society."

      Those of us who currently serve in the military or have served are your friends and neighbors. You have shown without a doubt your bias towards us. You disgust me.

      Now you have revealed where you gained your wast amount of military experience. Your wife has been given a job on post to support the militay. Instead of appreciating the fact the military gives her a job, you state the "lower echelons of military" are bigots. I hope she has more respect for our service members than you. You make me sick. The only way to truly understand the military is to serve in it. You are filth.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Well here is a fun one, legally the term is restricted toward that part of an attack that frightens. A battery is the actual unconsented to touching of another.

      So it is interesting that when time came -- common parlance, not military -- they almost use exclusively numbers and acronyms because that is what they like to make it impersonal-- the term meaning not to touch was used.

      When I worked down at 32nd street naval station, just for fun I would asked sailors if they knew what the acronym they just used stood for at least 3 out five did not. USNASC. Ask them NEX or PX not a clue.

    • ahorseback profile image

      ahorseback 4 years ago

      Eric , What the term "Assault Weapon "means , baffles me too!.......Jeees !, A knife? , a club ?.......a rock , these idiots are merely misinformed activists awaiting thier next cool-aid cause !......lol...Ed

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack, I do not think I am defending a point of view. Here are my headings:

      Assault weapons and fun

      Deadly Instruments we need.

      Utilitarian balancing act.

      Sometimes the best freedoms are ones not exercised.

      Conclusion: Degrees

      I do not see anything there that you disagree with at all ---- you just disagree with me.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: But a person who spent most their life in the military is not the one I go to for expertise about what is right under the constitution and for civil society.

      Jack replies: Again, Eric is trying to confuse the issue because he cannot effectively deal with logic and reason enough to defend his views.

      The whole issue of the "military" goes back to Eric's comment about the "bigotry" he supposedly saw in the lower ranks. The issue has (and had) nothing to do with firearms, knowledge, the Constitution, civil society, voting, or opinions.

      It only had to do with the validity of Eric's remarks concerning his perceived "bigotry" and his knowledge/experience of the military in regard to that. Nothing else.

      Eric knows that this is the case. There is no need wonder why he is attempting to confuse the issue.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack replies: With 26 years in the military I can say with certainly that Eric knows as much about the military as he does firearms. Little to nothing.

      Eric said: I think you make some valid points. So you are much more qualified to talk about weapons and their effect on society because you remained in the Military for 26 years. Let me think on that one.

      Jack: 1) I never said, posted, or hinted at such a thing as what Eric just claimed up above. This is why I quote everyone directly, so people can see that I don’t play games such as Eric does. The referecnce to my military service is clear to anyone who scrolls back in inch or three and reads it.

      Jack: Jack replies: With 26 years in the military I can say with certainly that Eric knows as much about the military as he does firearms. Little to nothing.''''///

      I think Jack brings up a valid point that we should ask. If a person spent the better part of their life in the military; Is their opinion more or less relevant. In San Diego the military is our largest consumer and wage payer/directly and indirectly. My wife works on a Naval Base. Her father and my father served in the military. We are proud of our armed forces.

      But a person who spent most their life in the military is not the one I go to for expertise about what is right under the constitution and for civil society.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: I think you make some valid points. So you are much more qualified to talk about weapons and their effect on society because you remained in the Military for 26 years. Let me think on that one.

      Jack replies: Go ahead and think on that one. In the meantime, I’ll point out some pertinent facts to the Dear Readers.

      1) I never said, posted, or hinted at such a thing as what Eric just claimed up above. This is why I quote everyone directly, so people can see that I don’t play games such as Eric does. The referecnce to my military service is clear to anyone who scrolls back in inch or three and reads it.

      2) Why does Eric make such an unsupported remark? Because he is stuck in a corner and this is his only way that he can see to get out. Ignore the issue, attack me, and hope that no one notices that he really had no way to defend his comments against logic and reason.

      Eric sez: So someone with a law degree would no much more about the constitution than a career military man with no formal legal training. I think that follows your premise.

      Jack replies: Eric has to continue his flailing around, seeking a way to de-rail the destruction of his own comments.

      Eric sez: I have never in this hub commented that any weapon should be forbidden. And yes I do posit the question why not?

      Jack replies: A distinction without a difference.

      Eric sez: To which you declare that I am too ignorant to understand them. That is cool. Maintain that attitude and people will not get better informed just more inflamed.

      Jack replies: You’re too ignorant to comment on them in a meaningful way that will be helpful to people. Do you deny that a flat earther should not be teaching a high school geography class?

      Eric sez: To say I know nothing about shooting -- and knowing full well I know more than most civilians is like calling all civilians stupid.

      Jack replies: You’ve given no evidence on this hub that you know guns at all. You’ve give just the opposite, in fact. And there is a difference between ignorant and stupid. I see you have problems with English also.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Carl and Jack, thank you so much for your time and effort informing me, the village idiot, about matters of weaponry. I have learned a great deal. I hope readers have also as this hub has a lot of views. Jack just published a new hub called The Second Amendment as a Prophylactic, which I highly recommend.

      And again a big hat's off and salute to these great Americans that serve in our military. And thank you for bringing some of your training into the minds of us less knowledgeable.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I think you make some valid points. So you are much more qualified to talk about weapons and their effect on society because you remained in the Military for 26 years. Let me think on that one.

      So someone with a law degree would no much more about the constitution than a career military man with no formal legal training. I think that follows your premise.

      I have never in this hub commented that any weapon should be forbidden. And yes I do posit the question why not? To which you declare that I am too ignorant to understand them. That is cool. Maintain that attitude and people will not get better informed just more inflamed.

      To say I know nothing about shooting -- and knowing full well I know more than most civilians is like calling all civilians stupid.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      "You make my point for me. FCG comes from where? What a moronic "abreviation" what do you think, I millionth of the world knows that as what it means, Yet billions know it means Finnish Control Group. The way you used it is just childish and reflects your disdain for common people. Which is further reflected of your attitude toward someone who is trying to advocate a position. Just look, people expect me to be on a side, but they do not expect it to be "one" side. They want to understand, because someone just looking for common understanding is so strange. Yet people flashing around little known acronyms to show their superiority and not communicate is so normal."

      I just googled firearm FCG and didn't receive any hits on the Finnish Control Group, but I did receive pages of links on fire control groups. The problem is that you expect people to take you seriously when you know nothing about the subject you are talking about and are unable to conduct the most basic research to educate yourself.

      "I must say I did see this bigotry in the very lower echelons of military."

      Not only have you insulted Jack and me, you have gone on to insult the military. Way to go genius. Please tell us about your wealth of military experience.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: OK genius, we will only let people vote who are as knowledgeable as you.

      Jack replies: Vote? When did that come up in the thread? The ONLY person who has used the word or concept “vote” is YOU, Eric. Not anyone else.

      Eric sez: (you could throw in some standbys like women, blacks and jews) That is just a few of the historic groups your concept is reminiscent of.

      Jack replies: How interesting. I use the word “ignorant” and the first words that come to Eric’s fingers are women, blacks and jews. Sometimes I really don’t have to comment on a comment. I can just leave it laying there for all to see and ponder.

      Eric sez: An attitude that people are not smart enough, is very sick and fascist.

      Jack replies: 1) No one has posted a single word about people being “smart” except for you. 2) Fascism is a form of government control over the means of production of goods. I am not sure what it is doing in this thread. Maybe I am not smart enough to figure it out.

      Eric sez: It is not your genius that makes them ineligible but rather your presumption that knowing more acronyms than someone else makes you smarter and more qualified.

      Jack replies: No, it is my knowledge that many people such as you have no actual facts on hand, and are filled with erroneous information but still feel as if you have important, valid points to make on critical issues.

      I know nothing about fishing and have no compulsion to write a hub declaring that certain techniques and equipment should be forbidden in the sport. You know nothing about firearms but you have a compulsion to declare that certain techniques and equipment should be forbidden in the sport of shooting.

      Eric sez: : I must say I did see this bigotry in the very lower echelons of military. This issue is not strictly technical but societal.

      Jack replies: With 26 years in the military I can say with certainly that Eric knows as much about the military as he does firearms. Little to nothing.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: Awesome, I saw a spoiler rip off and kill 30 people. --- I do not think so.

      Jack replies: Eric knows that he simply can’t counter my point so he goes for the silly post again.

      Eric sez: We are talking the instrumentality used by sick individuals to slaughter innocents.

      Jack replies:: And you still can’t counter my point with this sentence either, eh. You don’t know what those features mean on a military grade weapon and therefore you have no idea whether they should be on a civilian rifle. But you don’t like them because it makes you ffffeeeellll ggggooooddd as if you are actually doing something.

      Eric sez: You really overstep on this comment: Now name one important reason for a AR 15 to accept and use a large capacity magazine that we can buy on line.

      Jack replies: First, it’s the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of What Eric Thinks People Need. Secondly, I can name a dozen reasons but you can’t admit to accepting a single one of them as valid. Once you do, it destroys your whole argument and you can’t allow that to happen. We have previously noted your unwillingness to accept reality when you have been shown to be wrong on an issue. Why should this point be any different?

      Eric sez: Please hold your personal attack as it is hurting your credibility.

      Jack replies: There have been no personal attacks. Just pointed observations.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      OK genius, we will only let people vote who are as knowledgeable as you. (you could throw in some standbys like women, blacks and jews) That is just a few of the historic groups your concept is reminiscent of. An attitude that people are not smart enough, is very sick and fascist. It is not your genius that makes them ineligible but rather your presumption that knowing more acronyms than someone else makes you smarter and more qualified. I must say I did see this bigotry in the very lower echelons of military. This issue is not strictly technical but societal.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Awesome, I saw a spoiler rip off and kill 30 people. --- I do not think so. I look just like James Bond (take your pick) but people know I am not a super spy. We are talking the instrumentality used by sick individuals to slaughter innocents.

      You really overstep on this comment: Now name one important reason for a AR 15 to accept and use a large capacity magazine that we can buy on line.

      Please hold your personal attack as it is hurting your credibility.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      You make my point for me. FCG comes from where? What a moronic "abreviation" what do you think, I millionth of the world knows that as what it means, Yet billions know it means Finnish Control Group. The way you used it is just childish and reflects your disdain for common people. Which is further reflected of your attitude toward someone who is trying to advocate a position. Just look, people expect me to be on a side, but they do not expect it to be "one" side. They want to understand, because someone just looking for common understanding is so strange. Yet people flashing around little known acronyms to show their superiority and not communicate is so normal.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: I think a rose is a rose as an AR is most widely understood to mean assault rifle

      Jack replies: Understood by whom? Those who actually own and know about the rifles? Or those who know nothing about the rifles.

      Are you suggesting that those who are ignorant are the ones who are important in driving the discussion? Are we setting a new fashion in modern day discourse -- the ignorant lead the way?

      I can see why there is little to profit in discussion between the pro-freedom side and the anti-freedom side with the understanding that the anti-freedom side really don't have any obligation or need to actually have facts at hand, or even the most basic understanding of the subject.

      Yet they want to be the ones of charge of the "national dialogue" about firearms.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: I do not believe the 2nd amendment would be at all hurt by the regulation of the industry making sporting rifles look less like military weapons.

      Jack replies: Racing cars have spoilers for an important reason. Cars driving on the street often have similar spoilers for similar, important reasons.

      Those "looks" that you decry are there for important reasons on military grade weapons... and these are quite often the same important reasons for them being on civilian sporting rifles.

      Since you don't know what the reasons are that they exist on military grade rifles then it is clear you have no understanding of why they also exist on sporting rifles.

      BTW... it is not the Bill of Rights Only for Those Things That Look Acceptable.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      FCG=Fire Control Group. I would hate for you to do a little research on what you are trying to discuss.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Nice use of your particular abbreviation. Do not worry I will explain what the heck you are talking about if any cares.

      This is so typical of your "speak" --- you get so carried away in your self importance and acting like knowing what initials mean that you lose all credibility.

      You made your whole comment irrelevant to the audience to which it is addressed. That is really cool. But I am sure it means the world to NRA members --- well actually probably not.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      You are not listening. The AR is a great firearm. The improvements made in the M16 over the past decades have also been incorporated into the AR-15. It is very reliable and of high quality. The only parts that are not interchangeable are in the FCG. In the majority of high quality AR-15s , it can be said the parts are "military grade" or better.

      ONCE AGAIN, there is no need to distinguish between the two. A criminal carrying an AR-15 should be treated the same as a criminal carrying an M16. Both can cause serious damage in the wrong hands.

      DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS THE FCG.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Enough said, you think there is a difference. I think a rose is a rose as an AR is most widely understood to mean assault rifle --- even if technically it is a non-trademarked industry term for ArmoLite.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Carl. The scarcity comment is what ad campaigns are now doing in sales. "Hurry buy now, tomorrow will be to late".

      You do not "believe" in the concept of an "Assault Weapon". I understand your belief. I believe that anyone who has followed this hub, now is better informed of both positions.

      I am quite certain that a civilian can buy a weapon that looks identical (from 10-20 ft) to the "military grade" weaponry. I do not think that is a good idea. Even the toy gun industry self regulated away from such danger. There are good policy and welfare arguments that support my point of view. I do not believe the 2nd amendment would be at all hurt by the regulation of the industry making sporting rifles look less like military weapons. If for no other reason than to make the issues more clear for all.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      Also, I'm not going to explain the difference between a clip and a magazine. Do some research about what you are talking about before publishing this stuff.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      Higher capacity magazines are generally longer. Please do a search on 10, 20, 30, and 40 round magazines. You'll see what I am talking about.

      I'm not sure where you are going with the scarcity sales pitch remark. Do you understand that very, very few civilians actually own fully automatic or 3 round burst capable rifles? If you see a rifle that looks like an AR-15 or M16, it is almost certainly going to be an AR-15. All of the rifles you see for sale in regular stores are semi-auto only.

      Please listen again, the AR is a very capable firearm and is semi-auto only. All automatic firearms are highly restricted and very rarely seen outside the military. 3 round burst is used in the M16A2, M16A4, and the standard M4 that are issued to our military. There are some troops issued the M16A3 and the M4A1, but they are much less common in military service. Regardless almost all military shooting and training is done in the semi-automatic mode.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack Burton, Thanks for your time and advice. I wanted to get upset with your negative post ,,, Then I realized I kind of agree with you.

      Win-Win for Control freaks also!

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Carl,

      Thanks for dropping by and contributing again. I especially like your comment on knowing capacity by the magazine. But I was under the impression that you cannot because you can buy the large capacity magazines on line http://www.firinglineguns.com/high-capacity-gun-ma...

      I like the "scarcity" sales pitch at the bottom. Also could you address the issue of the difference between and ammo clip and a magazine, looks like marketers use them the same way.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric reaches for more hyperbole with the same, futile results. Those that actually know about AR style rifles laugh at him, and those that don't are getting properly educated by other posters.

      In all, a win-win for the pro-firearm side.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      "How in the hell does one determine the firing capability of these weapons from twenty yards?"

      Why would you need to be able to determine whether a firearm is semi-automatic or has a 3 round burst capability? Both firearms are capable of inflicting severe damage in the wrong hands. Both should be taken seriously.

      "If you have one and I cannot tell the firing capacity you would be, or one of us would be dead."

      Again, there should be no difference in how a person should be treated. Both a semi-automatic firearm and and a selective fire firearm are capable of causing a lot of damage in the wrong hands.

      "Do we agree that we can't stop and ask someone with a AR-15 what the capacity is? Can we agree that the risk of it being fully automatic outweighs the right of a person to have one?"

      I can tell capacity by the size of the magazine. Please see my previous two answers regarding capability.

      "Those two questions are what this hub boils down to. Do you need a weapon that completely looks like a fully automatic bullet hose Assault weapon for fun?"

      Did you see in my post who uses the AR-15? Many law abiding gun owners are also tired of the anti-gun crowd trying to tell us what we "need."

      "Would not good Americans give up such gaming pleasantires. This is not about protection or militias. This is about "style" and what looks more gangster, and how fun to look like video games and silly movies."

      Please see previous answer.

      "Lest you need more subtlety: Guys and dolls that own and play with these "AR Style" weapons are imagining something wrong, very wrong.

      I do not think they sit around and think about carving up cardboard or concrete."

      Most of the shooters I know that have AR-15s are pretty peaceful people. Many of them are military and prior military. They do enjoy shooting paper targets on the weekend.

      "A hunter with a 3 round bust capacity is a down right lousy hunter."

      3 round burst firearms are regulated the same as automatic rifles. They are extremely restricted and expensive. People are not hunting deer with them.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Since this is my Hub, let me be frank, That last comment was a rambling bunch of non-sequitor paragraphs.

      Whining about confusion does not clear it up.

      How in the hell does one determine the firing capability of these weapons from twenty yards?

      If you have one and I cannot tell the firing capacity you would be, or one of us would be dead.

      Do we agree that we can't stop and ask someone with a AR-15 what the capacity is? Can we agree that the risk of it being fully automatic outweighs the right of a person to have one?

      Those two questions are what this hub boils down to. Do you need a weapon that completely looks like a fully automatic bullet hose Assault weapon for fun?

      Would not good Americans give up such gaming pleasantires. This is not about protection or militias. This is about "style" and what looks more gangster, and how fun to look like video games and silly movies.

      Lest you need more subtlety: Guys and dolls that own and play with these "AR Style" weapons are imagining something wrong, very wrong.

      I do not think they sit around and think about carving up cardboard or concrete.

      A hunter with a 3 round bust capacity is a down right lousy hunter.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      @Eric

      I'm really getting more confused with what you're trying to say about the distinction between military firearms and their civilian semi-automatic variants.

      You stated:

      "What you are referring to are simply not assault weapons. I now see your concern over confusion with a style of weapon. Good point. I think we made clear AR is often just used to denote the style made by AmoLite. Is there a reason to restrict semi-automatic AR style weapons like we do and should do more of with Military Grade Fully automatic Assault Rifles?"

      "I suggest this reality. If a cop next to a school sees a person with this style weapon they must shoot to kill. In 1.5 seconds 30 children could die if he does not. No questions no warning just kill the person."

      Are you saying the police would shoot a person with an AR-15 because they might think it was an M16 and because of this AR-15s should be restricted? Are you also saying that the AR-15 is useless and serves no purpose because it does not have a 3 round burst capability? Are you aware the majority of police departments operate AR-15s, not M16s? Did you know that the majority of contractors deployed to provide security in Iraq and Afghanistan also carried semi-automatic AR-15s and successfully engaged foreign fighters carrying fully-automatic AK-47s? I would have had no issue with deploying with a high quality AR-15 instead of an M-16. The "spray and pray" stuff only works well in the movies.

      "Why are most toy guns made with gaudy wild colors? Would a right thinking man send his ten year old out on the street with a beautiful perfect toy replica of an AK-47? I suggest and still do that we have a balancing act."

      Again, are you saying the AR-15 is an ineffective replica of the M16 and should be banned to prevent confusion between the two?

      "You can have the weapons you defend our right to have. But if you brandish it in any way in public that is worthy cause to use deadly force against you all by itself. Without warning."

      Webster's defines brandish as to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly. I think we can agree on that one. Doing that here in Texas could very well get you shot by a concealed carry holder.

      "Now please clear up any further confusion my "misrepresentations" have caused.

      Why even have a fake bank robbery note in your hand? Why joke in a TSA line about the bomb on you? Why carry a weapon that looks like what it is not?"

      Again the AR-15 is a capable firearm and anyone using it with criminal intent should be dealt with seriously. There should be no distinction on how to engage a criminal based on a 3 round burst capability.

      I'm not trying to persuade the anti-gun folks to go after the AR, but your reasons don't seem logical or informed.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      This hub was not and is not about the ArmoLite. It is about Assault Weapons. The purpose was and is for clarity. You and Jack have marvelously helped all readers to understand.

      Just because a weapon looks like a "bullet hose" does not mean it is. But why would you want one that looked like something it is not?

      I think a good statement from you on that would be helpful. Especially since you have proudly served our nation in the armed services.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      Really, your comeback is that AR could stand for Arkansas, or etc. I think it was pretty clear that we were discussing AR in the context of the AR-15. I was also trained and qualified to carry the M16 in the military. I am fully aware of the difference between the civilian AR-15 and the M16A2 which is only a 3 round burst capability. Do you think military personnel are trained to just run around spraying bullets everywhere? I hate to break the news to you, but most troops are not issued fully automatic "bullet hoses" because they are not efficient. I've also never heard of AR-15s refered to as "fake wannabe weapons" that look cool. You have clearly shown your ignorance of both platforms.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Nice bubble you live in. Read more of my stuff and get a little more in touch. AR also stands for Arkansas, AR also is how many say Arizona Revised Statutes. There are some bozos that call it Artificial Resuscitation. It is not a copyright or a trademark or any kind of universal ownership. Gun "smithy" moron enthusiasts might say that is what it means. Or maybe not! Get off it the discussion of what AR means is only about context.

      What my hub is arguing is that we must understand the weapons and what they are, and what purpose they serve. I have every reason to believe you have fired make believes but never an assault rifle. Burton maybe knows the difference. Fully automatic bullet hoses have caused the concern --- but to fix the issue we must also look at fake wannabe weapons that look cool.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      Again, what are you tring to argue?

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      No, AR does not stand for assault rifle. Anyone who thinks it does is clueless and has sabotaged their argument.

      I also own a Jeep. If someone refers to a Suzuki as a Jeep, they have also lost all credibility and their opinion will not be taken seriously on Jeeps.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Well you would be right in the very limited circles. But any normal person knows AR now stands for Assault Rifle. Did you know in the 60's to seventies -- Kleenex was the word for Tissue? Jeep is another fun one along these same lines. Good thing we have threepete and SUV straightened out.

      Arguing the names is linguistics, semantics, sophistry and trademark. To go there ask a serious question.

      AR was what you say. Groovy, hip, word, truth, boss, cool and awesome all fit in the same category.

      Go get a new talking point that is lame.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      @Eric

      I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. Are you for or against semi-automatic rifles?

      Also, AR is not generic for assault rifle. AR stood for Armalite Rifle. Armalite is also not known for developing "many assault rifles." Eugene Stoner designed the AR-15, the AR-18, and a couple others which did not go very far while working for Armalite.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Sorry Friend. Misspelled. ArmaLite designed many Assault Rifles. Colt now manufactures them. The trade name was once used to denote the Assault Rifle in General. That was AR. Now AR is basically generic to Assault Rifles.

      If it causes confusion look to the context and it will be clear. AR styles are popular for folks that cross the line sort of between gaming and reality with weapons. Probably 90% of AR style weapons are not Assault Weapons. They are a wannabe/replica that does not have the same function.

    • profile image

      Carl 4 years ago

      @eric

      Who is AmoLite?

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      It is this reason that I wrote the hub. To teach people the distinction.

      What you are referring to are simply not assault weapons. I now see your concern over confusion with a style of weapon. Good point. I think we made clear AR is often just used to denote the style made by AmoLite. Is there a reason to restrict semi-automatic AR style weapons like we do and should do more of with Military Grade Fully automatic Assault Rifles?

      I suggest this reality. If a cop next to a school sees a person with this style weapon they must shoot to kill. In 1.5 seconds 30 children could die if he does not. No questions no warning just kill the person.

      Why are most toy guns made with gaudy wild colors? Would a right thinking man send his ten year old out on the street with a beautiful perfect toy replica of an AK-47? I suggest and still do that we have a balancing act.

      You can have the weapons you defend our right to have. But if you brandish it in any way in public that is worthy cause to use deadly force against you all by itself. Without warning.

      Now please clear up any further confusion my "misrepresentations" have caused.

      Why even have a fake bank robbery note in your hand? Why joke in a TSA line about the bomb on you? Why carry a weapon that looks like what it is not?

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric says: I am certain that many people have assault weapons because they are fun.

      Jack replies: So, Eric, you believe that "many people" have an assault weapon made for the particular purpose of rapid firing lethal projectiles in the direction of an entrenched enemy. One that is fully automatic.

      Just where do you find these "many people" who are only out for fun?

      Especially since the mere possession of a fully automatic rifle is prohibited by Federal law since the 1930s, unless the owner jumps through many hoops including getting personal approval from his county sheriff and paying a special Federal tax.

      Eric sez: Unless the downside is strong enough not to have something just for fun.

      Jack replies: And of these "many people" who have spent at least six months getting approval from the Federal government to buy the weapon and has spent about $10,000 to buy it just how many of them have used their "fully automatic rifle" in a crime? Can you tell us a specific "downside" to those who legally own a fully automatic rifle? Give detail.

      Again, Dear Readers, Eric is trying to pull a bait and switch with you. He is writing about "military grade" fully automatic weapons, and pretending that those are sold down at the local sporting goods store.

      The National Firearms Act of 1934 regulated the sale and possession of fully automatic weapons. It is legal to own them in most states, but again, you have to seek permission from both local and federal authorities and they cost a ton of money. They are also extremely regulated and monitored by the feds.

      The Comprehensive Crime Control Act and the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984-1986 put many further restrictions on civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons, primary that one cannot be sold or bought if it was manufactured past 1984. That means that ANY fully auto rifle made in the past 30 years cannot be legally owned in America.

      http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/10/politics/us-gun-laws

      So why is Eric writing a hub about people "owning and using" fully automatic weapons? Because he knows that most of the population really doesn't understand these distinctions. They really think that fully automatic weapons are available for a few hundred dollars at Walmart and no background check. They think that hunters are going out into the woods and shooting Bambi 30 times in 2 seconds.

      By confusing the two, a fully auto weapon with a semi-auto weapon it becomes much easier to get the public to demand that semi-autos be banned also.

      And that is why I jumped into the hub to offer the truth to you readers.

      I can't speak to Eric's motivations... but I certainly can speak to his misrepresentations.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack you are right ---

      "An assault weapon is one made for the particular purpose of rapid firing lethal projectiles in the direction of an entrenched enemy. This is meant to “pin” the opponent down. Militias are for protection and defense of property and people therein. Assault weapons are not meant to attack groups of people as no real interest is served in mass homicide. An assault weapon is not a defensive weapon. Assault weapons are to be employed in team operations. Without a team an assault weapon serves no purpose."

      I stand by that conclusion and find nothing to the contrary in all your reference work up.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      It takes a special kind of person to dismiss Encyclopedia Britannia, CBS News and the New York Times with a wave of their hands. I'll leave it up to the Dear Readers how credible they are as sources versus you.

      And again, you are trying to make me the focus of the thread instead of your continued errors of fact about these rifles.

      I can see why you would rather not actually discuss what you posted in black and pixel.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      We do not do midweek nightcaps here. We are more a Navy town and store up for leave and weekends. It is hardly 8 here.

      I get it now, you use development sites for Britannica and CBS news for your sources. They say about the internet -- garbage in and garbage out. Do you understand Beta versus Alpha. Do you know what a stringer is.

      Do you know who Janes is?

      Hey Jack, site your education and experience in firearms. I think you do not know what you speak but only get talking points.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      eric sez: Jack I do not see you as an advocate of what you are advocating. Are you strictly a PR man with spin? Your 500,000 hits must be under an alias, what corp would that be? And please do not tell me you were hired by AmoLite.

      Jack replies: It's bedtime, eric, and it reads as if you've had far too many beers for a nightcap. Try again tomorrow and perhaps you'll make more sense.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      So you don't really have any cite, any true evidence, any anything that shows that the shooter used a "Military Grade Fully automatic assault weapons" at Newton.

      Just feelings and emotions.

      Figures.

      I, myself, prefer to quote from CBS News...

      "Investigators believe most of the bullets came from a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle"

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57559416/ass...

      The Bushmaster .223 sold on the civilian market and the one that his mother owned, which was stolen by him, is not, in any way possible, a "Military Grade Fully automatic assault weapons".

      Eric, you're better off complaining that Britannica really isn't Britannica. That's much funnier and easier to laugh at then someone getting the most basic facts about the murder of children completely wrong.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jack I do not see you as an advocate of what you are advocating. Are you strictly a PR man with spin? Your 500,000 hits must be under an alias, what corp would that be? And please do not tell me you were hired by AmoLite.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Easy Jack. ........

      The death toll divided my the time of firing, combined with history and known use of the weapon, Eye witness accounts that could not count the shots fired in any way. The "style" and accommodation of the bullets retrieved and where.

      But the most conclusive evidence at all is marksmanship versus death count. The man was not a trained rifleman. The bullets holes on the children were not kill shots. No one saw him aim a gun to marksmanship level. He was clearly a coward and deranged. It takes a well oiled machine to achieve the death count. If done by aiming. No military man could do that even considering Mai li Massacre.

      I do not give a damn about stupid conspiracy theories --- but if you go down that road I will be intrigued.

      You lose all credibility by even suggesting it was not a bullet hose that killed those children. The guy that did it was a sick man incapable of pulling off the death count any other way.

      Or do you have a second shooter on the knoll or secret agents in wings or a Hollywood stunt?

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Can you give a cite that shows "/// Military Grade Fully automatic assault weapons" were used in Newton? That will be quite a feat.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Let us stop the crap. (although I have learned very good points from you and you have expanded my understanding, thank you)

      I think we agree there needs to be a little bit more, shall we say, "enforcement opportunities" against unlawful ownership, discharge and modifications of the ever increasing numbers of //// Military Grade Fully automatic assault weapons as was used in Newton////

      However stylized weapons that simply look the same and are fully semi-automatic should be left alone?

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      1. an assault rifle does not fire one bullet at a time, but may have that option.

      [Do you believe that “assault rifles” are being sold down at the local sporting goods store to the general public? If not, then why does your hub focus on what you just admitted are fully automatic rifles?]

      2. "styles" of rifles is a misnomer in discussion about restricting weapons.

      [As noted in my post, “style” is used in general discussion about firearms. You don’t have veto power over the language that people use.]

      3. functionality is the only important distinguishing factor for understanding the problem with assault rifles.

      [And you just admitted that the “function” of a fully automatic assault weapon is different from the semi-auto rifle being sold on the market.]

      4. No one ever suggested restricting availability of weapons based on the name or style. Well maybe some politicians.

      [Takes a special kind of person to contradict himself in two sentences. Especially since there HAVE BEEN and ARE just those legal restrictions based on the name and style.]

      5. An assault rifle serves a very serious purpose.

      [You just admitted that an “assault rifle” fires multiple bullets with one pull of the trigger so just how does that affect the general community?]

      6. A fully automatic Military grade Assault rifle can fire 30 rounds in about 1.5 seconds.

      [And they are not sold down at Walmart, right?]

      7. The "stylized" sport utility rifles are semi-automatic and fire the same as a fast pistol at about 3 rounds in that same 1.5 seconds.

      [So why does your hub try to conflate the two into the same weapon?]

      8. My references are to the military grade fully automatic assault weapon.

      [No use trying to change, people have scroll back, you know. Your references are to the same type of firearm that people are buying in general.]

      9. I am not limited to refer to only ArmaLites or Bushmasters or Ak series.

      [Big deal]

      10. If Mr. Burton wants to confuse the issue with names and manufacturers and differing "styles" there is a reason for that.

      [Eric thought that AR stood for “assault rifle” and yet I am the one who is “confused.” How droll… ]

      11. Fully automatic assault weapons are what the issue is about, not hunting or sport rifles.

      [No, you were attempting to confuse the readers into thinking that fully automatic assault weapons are what are being sold and bought by the general public. I would quote you but the readers can certain just scroll up a few lines and see for themselves exactly what you say about it.]

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      1. an assault rifle does not fire one bullet at a time, but may have that option.

      2. "styles" of rifles is a misnomer in discussion about restricting weapons.

      3. functionality is the only important distinguishing factor for understanding the problem with assault rifles.

      4. No one ever suggested restricting availability of weapons based on the name or style. Well maybe some politicians.

      5. An assault rifle serves a very serious purpose.

      6. A fully automatic Military grade Assault rifle can fire 30 rounds in about 1.5 seconds.

      7. The "stylized" sport utility rifles are semi-automatic and fire the same as a fast pistol at about 3 rounds in that same 1.5 seconds.

      8. My references are to the military grade fully automatic assault weapon.

      9. I am not limited to refer to only ArmaLites or Bushmasters or Ak series.

      10. If Mr. Burton wants to confuse the issue with names and manufacturers and differing "styles" there is a reason for that.

      11. Fully automatic assault weapons are what the issue is about, not hunting or sport rifles.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: Basics first: No one ever referred to an Assault Rifle as an AR - meaning ArmaLite.

      Jack replies: Well, Dear Readers, who are you going to believe, some hack on the 'net or the New York Times...?

      "At least 60 companies manufacture AR-15s or AR-15 accessories. The AR-15 was first built by ArmaLite, and the name was trademarked by Colt, which bought the design, but it is widely used to describe all brands and models of the rifle."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/us/lanza-used-a-...

      Or we can look to the definative World Guns website and see what they have to say...

      "Before we start, it must be pointed out that “AR-15” is a registered trade mark of Colt’s Manufacturing Co, Inc. Therefore, only rifles made by Colt or Colt licensees can be legally marked as “AR-15”. Rifles of similar design but made by everyone else are usually described as “AR-15 type” or “AR-15 style” and bear various proprietary model designations, such as SR-15, XM-15, Z-15 etc."

      http://world.guns.ru/civil/usa/ar-15-e.html

      Well, look at that... the phrase "AR style" is found right there. Just the same way I used it.

      Face it... Eric really, in his heart and brain, thought that AR stood for "assault rifle." He admits it in his very own post. Doesn't matter who I am, or how he wants to suddenly make me the focus of the thread.

      Eric sez: An assault rifle is and will be a bullet hose and wrong it the hands of civilians.

      Jack replies: A modern sports utility rifle that Eric mislabels an "assault rifle" fires one bullet at a time with one pull of the trigger, just the same as every other gun on the market. Eric knows this... and it makes one wonder why he doesn't want YOU to know it.

      Eric sez: Your citation is definately not to Britannica. but a marketing page.

      Jack replies: Yes, that is why it is found at britannica.com and the About Us link takes us directly to the ©2012 Encyclopedia Britannica Inc website.

      You really have to find better hills to defend.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I am honored, I have not gone up against a pro since the domain name battles at the turn of the century. I am happy this is such an important issue, and that it is being managed in the battlefront by pros such as yourself.

      Basics first: No one ever referred to an Assault Rifle as an AR - meaning ArmaLite. Armalite has about twelve weapons that they advertise/promote under a copyright game known as AR and then the series, including pistols and long range rifles.

      The American military has never listed a description of such weapons as ArmaLite as that is clearly a wrong thing to do.

      ArmaLite is a trademarked group. It is absolutely not armalite, the L must be capitalized. Who cares but us who know. Fairchild Industries is the parent corp. Fairchild is a mix of horrible corporate raiders.

      Your citation to Britannica is a bogus marketing piece that you probably wrote and posted. Your citation is definately not to Britannica. but a marketing page.

      Quite simply, except for hacks at "AR" no one knows this weapon by this name and your are lying. There are at least twenty variables by other companies and your claims are a slander on their name.

      I love that you lay out your most proving credential. You write for hits and feed our malleable youth. A quick check of your profile shows clearly that you are a professional spinner. You are a most admirable writer and scum artist.

      I think you should pack up and go elsewhere. Before I make you look more silly and it gets back to your oncologist, corporate raiders bossse.

      An assault rifle is and will be a bullet hose and wrong it the hands of civilians.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric sez: Thank you for dropping by and slamming my point of view with an obvious intent to garner traffic to your hub. A little too transparent though for my readers.

      Jack replies: No, it is an obvious intent to give people a source to know that you’re blowing smoke about the subject. I will graphically point that out in just a moment.

      Eric sez: I am certain that you think your self a very smart and knowledgeable person but here is your tell otherwise: "AR style rifles"

      Why would anyone say "assault rifle style rifle"?

      Jack replies: Here ya go, Dear Readers. If you want serious proof that Eric is not very knowledgeable about the subject that he is writing about this is all you need.

      AR in AR style rifles does not stand for “assault rifles” and it never did. AR stands for Armalite, the company that originally developed that particular type of action for a rifle.

      Here’s a cite from the Encyclopedia Britannica that lets you know the truth…

      http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/35082/Ar...

      But Eric really, really, in his heart, thought that AR stood for “assault rifle.” This is how much you can trust his hub to give you the actual facts about the issue.

      Eric sez: The short answer is because they do not get it.

      Jack replies: I’d be careful, Eric, in stating so baldly who does not “get it.”

      Eric sez: Your title also shows lack of understanding "Evil" on a thing is quite childish, unless it is a spoof!

      Jack replies: Almost 500,000 google hits on the phrase “evil black rifle.” I would hardly say that the term is original with me. BTW, my hub is #6 on that google list, of which I am particularly pleased.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Thank you for dropping by and slamming my point of view with an obvious intent to garner traffic to your hub. A little too transparent though for my readers.

      I am certain that you think your self a very smart and knowledgeable person but here is your tell otherwise: "AR style rifles"

      Why would anyone say "assault rifle style rifle"? The short answer is because they do not get it. Assault is the operative word and the redundancy of rifle indicates a lack of understanding no pro would make except friends of maybe Nancy Pelosi or Feinstein.

      Your title also shows lack of understanding "Evil" on a thing is quite childish, unless it is a spoof!

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Eric... you say you know weapons but you are purposefully misleading the readers about the true nature of the AR style rifles that are being sold in increasingly large numbers.

      They can read my hub on "Evil Black Rifles" and find out that virtually everything you posted is in error. I will leave it to others to discern and discuss your motives for doing so.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Niteriter, I am seriously trained and licensed to carry a bunch of guns. I do not. I have no reality that tells me to take the life of another. But I could with a ball point pen. I choose love and compassion and happily give my life. If my wife and children's life were in danger I do not believe that a firearm would change that equation.

    • Niteriter profile image

      Niteriter 4 years ago from Canada

      Maybe the issue is not about guns at all. Maybe it's about discovering how we arrived at the idea that it's okay to kill other people.

      When you carry a deadly weapon, you have already decided that you are prepared to kill if necessary. "Necessary" is a nebulous condition that is open to serious errors in judgement. When deadly weapons are absent, errors in judgement are far less likely to be deadly.

      Best wishes, Eric.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I love that constitution. I shall get right into it. But that is a whole hub.

      I am constantly torn between infringing and protection. Generally I do not want protection.

    • ahorseback profile image

      ahorseback 4 years ago

      And maybe then we can teach from the end back to the beginning ......."shall not be infringed"....:-}

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      We have got to step aside from our beliefs and feelings and first teach. I feel like I am up to speed and therefor mostly alone. hihihi

    • ahorseback profile image

      ahorseback 4 years ago

      Ha ! I understand comepletely !.. The rifleman ....good example ! When all this hype dies down and we can begin to really affect change maybe then ....maybe then !........:-}

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I think you are quite right ahorseback. Do you remember the Rifleman with Chuck Connor? From that we learned exactly what a rifle was. And more importantly that any gun could be made to wreak havoc and death.

      What a good rifleman can do with any weapon is just amazing. But what we are facing now is that any wingnut can do horrible things with a weapon with out skill.

      Here is one to think about. I would much rather be singled out and shot for a bad reason, than to be mowed down with a group for no reason. Why does it matter? I do not know for sure.

    • ahorseback profile image

      ahorseback 4 years ago

      No Tv till you were eight ! Jesus , your as old as I am !...I agree with what you're saying as to the utilitarian uses for cars , guns , except the "assault weapon ban " hysteria is just that , hysteria ! A semi -automatic gun is what far too many people are trying to make this issue about ! I have an old ruger 22,semi-auto pistol , 10 round clip , is that then an assault pistol ? Or I once had an old bird hunting semi-auto shotgun ...again ,assault weapon ? No ! The only diff between these two I discribe and a black -gun semi -auto is the color ! As to what is legal , all three are semi-auto .....one pull of the trigger one shot fired ! Maybe all of this issue is but the distraction to keep the public from the real issues . Who knows my friend !

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Thanks Bill. We have come a long way into intruding on our lives. Some times I feel like throwing my hat in with the radicals against any regulation, just to curb what we have.

      But not on Assault weapons.

    • billybuc profile image

      Bill Holland 4 years ago from Olympia, WA

      I was laughing because of the statement about seat belts. I have been against that law since it was made. Yes, I believe seat belts save lives and no, I do not believe the government has the right to save us from ourselves. That hovers on the Big Brother scenario that I am not comfortable with.

      There are some valid points here well-worth reading.