The god of Liberty is a hungry god. Child Sacrifice Uvalde edition. [UNLV Update]

You're correct, many militias in the US can't stand for long periods due to the donut abuse.

No, a lot of them use the M16 (and subsequent variants) that are essentially modified AR15s.

With that select fire that is illegal for civilians. Gun grabbing piss pots seem determined to ignore the distinction that makes them NOT military issue weapons.

This is true. The M16 is based on the AR-15, though at the time, the M16A1 had fully automatic firing capability while the AR-15 is a semi-automatic, in that you can only fire one bullet with one pull of the trigger.

The most recent M16 model is the M16A4, which has a semi-automatic fire but also a triple burst fire feature, something modern AR-15s do not have. Just as you can say a flintlock is a military weapon because at one time it was, the AR-15 can be called the same, but it is still a civilian weapon because it lacks the triple burst and auto-firing options. While that doesn't sound like it should make a difference, it truly does. An AR-15 is no different from any other standard one trigger pull means one bullet rifle, it's just made to look like the modern M16, and since the M16 is a powerful, highly dangerous, somewhat scary looking gun, that has an effect on people. The AR-15 does not possess that same stopping power or triple fire option, and modifying it to do so is highly illegal for civilians.

The US Army will be replacing the M16A4 next year with the Sig Sauer XM7 and the XM250 automatic rifle. I suspect people will want semi-automatic versions of those as well.

So, the thing doesn't become a different thing just because you use a some other word to describe it?

Don't blow your own dick off and you won't have to find out.

Hold up there, cheech. There is a noticeable difference with the AR-15 compared with other non-magazine rifles.

With the AR-15, you can have a 30-round box magazine. You can empty that pretty fucking quick, and it takes only a few seconds to change the magazine.

By contrast, a typical Browning bolt-action hunting rifle can only hold five rounds, and you have to work a bit more than an AR-15 to chamber the next round.

Which one is going to the weapon of preferred choice for mass shootings?

The one with the larger magazine, but that's not just the AR-15. You can buy 30 round mags for many different rifles. Hell, there are high capacity magazines that hold 100 rounds, and you can buy those, too. Again, not just for the AR-15. Many civilian rifles can be equipped with a high capacity magazine. The M1903 Springfield can hold a 40 round magazine, for example, and that gun is over 100 years old.

Point being that any sane, rational person can see the problem here.

"Assault rifle" may be an inflammatory term that gets the second amendment wankers riled up, but it's not an entirely inaccurate description.

It's not inaccurate because it's such a broad term. Any rifle can be an assault rifle with the way it's used in media terminology.

But it’s a convenient excuse for gun nuts to dismiss concerns for non gun lovers.

Indeed, it can be. There's far too much disingenuous word play on both sides, and the thing is, it's understandable. Responsible gun owners will tend to agree that there needs to be background checks, some limitations on ammo, on who can carry, et. al, and people on the opposing side generally don't want to take away everyone's guns, they just want existing gun laws enforced, and the gun lobby to get its ass out of congress. All of those things are reasonable positions.

That’s just crazy talk.

Tru 'dat! KHere in Idaho, from my experience a very large part of the population (especially those born here) have proper respect for the care and maintenance of firearms and they know how to use them safely. Unfortunately, the foaming at the mouth right-wing Trumpistas are ready to pounce on anyone who dares suggest that any sort of regulation might do something beneficial.

hmmm...

Google:
"ar 15 conversion kit to full auto build"

About 46,400,000 results (0.62 seconds)

I'm gonna guess most gravy seal groups have members that are skilled enough to do so...

This. I can kill that stupid swan thing in Fallout 4 with an automatic weapon. But, with a shotgun or some other rifle that I have to constantly load, I have a difficult time killing a mole rat.

First, I believe it takes a bit of machining. So not quite the average home garage tools.

Second, it is illegal to do that, and the result is an illegal weapon. No need for additional, redundant laws there.

pretty sure the militia community isn't overly concerned with legality...

also appears it doesn't require much more skill than basic mechanics... and that's to do it properly, let alone the jerry rigged methods described at the link.

We prohibited the FAL 40 years ago here for similar reasons, as I recall.

Well then by all means lets pass more laws and pat ourselves on the back for "doing something. "

Or you're minimizing it for self-serving reasons.

Okay.

And when that changes nothing, will you concede that violence rates trend with crime rates, and your focus should always have been on people rather than inanimate objects? I doubt it.

Except that school shootings went down drastically under the assault weapons ban.

I posted the dipping crime stats for that period. Nobody cared.

Maybe you should have tried being more likeable.

Story of my life.

a) yes, like limit accessibility to the capability to make fully automatic firearms out of semi automatic ones...

b) hardly minimizing... you didn't bother to read the link showing several methods of making a conversion, did you? either way, it seems it can even be done in the field and you're remaining intentionally ignorant for your own self serving reasons.

that's about as insightful as water being wet...

there's nothing to "concede"... "this type of crime goes down when overall crime is down"? not astute...

but yeah... so if it's people and not inanimate objects, how do we divert people from criminality? y'know... short of reintroducing segregation, banning divorce, and life sentences for vagrancy as you've suggested in the past?

You don't divert people from criminality. Free will is sacrosanct. What you do is remove violent criminals from society.

that's your final solution for everything... never dealing with causes.

The cause of a crime is a person choosing to commit one. You can save your breath if you're hoping to sell me "society made me do it." Not all poor people commit crimes.