Check my work - assault weapons presentation

[wreave]

I've been thinking of this and wanted to have something I could show to an intelligent, logical person to help them understand the fallacies of the proposed Assault Weapon Ban and general issues related to "assault weapons".

Take a look at this and share your thoughts. There's a lot of slides, but it's easy to flip through quickly.

If you have specific feedback, please tell me the slide number and comment. E.g. "slide 41, you spelled 'Fucktard' wrong".

http://www.2shared.com/document/xU7-...eapons_v2.html

I know you won't all agree with the Conclusions/Solutions, but that's okay - I didn't make it for you. After taking comments, I will publish a revised version that you may use freely.

[SideShow Bob]

Your first, and biggest mistake is using the false term of "ASSAULT WEAPON" or any of the media's inflammatory catch phrases.

[wreave]

Your first, and biggest mistake is using the false term of "ASSAULT WEAPON" or any of the media's inflammatory catch phrases.

Considering the whole point is to illustrate the idiocy of the term using their own definitions, I respectfully disagree.

[blacklabel]

Looks good to me from a grammar/spelling standpoint. I have to agree though that the use of "assault weapon" is a little frustrating.

[Gman]

Slide 29 was about the Mini 14...but you fell back to referring to it as a 10/22...3 times.

The Ruger Mini 14 is based on the popular and successful
military M14 and M1 rifles.
 It is chambered for the least deadly rifle cartridge in modern military
history, the 5.56 NATO/.223.
 Like the Ruger 10/22 and AR-15, it is customizable.
 On the previous slide, the 10/22 on the left has a
telescoping stock, pistol grip, flash hider, and 30-round
magazine. (No bayonet lug or grenade launcher.)
 The 10/22 on the right is fitted with a traditional wood
stock, and only has a 5-round magazine in this picture.
 Note that even the wood-stock version accepts 30-round magazines
 There is no functional difference between these rifles.
The only differences are cosmetic.

[wreave]

Slide 29 was about the Mini 14...but you fell back to referring to it as a 10/22...3 times.

The Ruger Mini 14 is based on the popular and successful
military M14 and M1 rifles.
 It is chambered for the least deadly rifle cartridge in modern military
history, the 5.56 NATO/.223.
 Like the Ruger 10/22 and AR-15, it is customizable.
 On the previous slide, the 10/22 on the left has a
telescoping stock, pistol grip, flash hider, and 30-round
magazine. (No bayonet lug or grenade launcher.)
 The 10/22 on the right is fitted with a traditional wood
stock, and only has a 5-round magazine in this picture.
 Note that even the wood-stock version accepts 30-round magazines
 There is no functional difference between these rifles.
The only differences are cosmetic.

Thanks. Actually only the third/fourth bullets incorrectly reference the 10/22. Changed that one to Mini 14.

-----

On the "inffringed", I didn't create that graphic. Ugh. I like it, but don't want to leave in the misspelling. Guess I'll have to make my own.

[Gman]

Slide 49 "Inffringed" misspelled.

Personally, I don't believe the universal background checks are a solution. They're another level of control. Firearms are property protected by the 2nd Amendment, therefore outlawing private sale of property without government approval is an infringement.

I also don't buy into the safe storage requirement.

[wreave]

Slide 49 "Inffringed" misspelled.

Personally, I don't believe the universal background checks are a solution. They're another level of control. Firearms are property protected by the 2nd Amendment, therefore outlawing private sale of property without government approval is an infringement.

I also don't buy into the safe storage requirement.

Created my own graphic with the correct spelling of infringed.

I understand that many don't agree with universal background checks. I certainly don't feel they're a panacea, especially considering that most of the mass shooters passed background checks (though they might not under new mental health regulations). However, I think it demonstrates that the responsible firearm owner community actually does care about keeping firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them. It's hard to say that now when many FTF transactions occur with no exchange of anything but cash, and a "peek" at a driver's license is as far as most people will go.

Safe storage is also a challenge. That's why I put it on the possibles. We don't know the facts around Adam Lanza (and may never), but it's reasonable to believe his mother knew he had problems and that he had access to the firearms. If a thief stole a firearm, would a trigger lock be a deterrent to its use? I doubt it. It seems like something that's fair to discuss, but I don't have all the answers worked out in my head on that one.

[Gman]

Sorry, I wrote "twice" on the Mini 14 response and then my brain said "I remember seeing it more than twice" and when I went back looking for the number of times it appeared I saw 3. Whooops.

We care. We also have repeatedly been bending on what "shall not be infringed" means. How many other of our "rights" have this level of restrictions and caveats? It's a slippery slope and we've been sliding for quite some time. I don't think it's time to lubricate the slope. We need to be following the first rule of holes; when you find yourself in one, put down the shovel.

Instead, we seem to be getting focused on what color, the shape and length of the handle, or the size of the blade on the shovel.

[CO303]

My AR-15 is my defensive rifle; chosen for home and personal defense. Defense is a three front issue; Personal and Family Protection, Defense of Property, and Protection from Over-reaching Government and Alien Invaders. I am guaranteed the right to own weapons for this purpose by the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. According to the arguements of the Federalist Papers; The weapons I own should be equivilent to the threats I face. This is why I own a Defensive Rifle. Thanks for listening. If you disagree, move to Great Britain.