Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Slideshow on the Truth of Assault Weapons
A friend linked this on Facebook and I found it quite informative in laymen's terms. What do you all think?
http://www.assaultweapon.info/
Simple webpage, just hit the "right" arrow key to go to the next page.
I think its great. Clear, concise, good data. I posted it to Facebook earlier today, and it generated some pretty lively debate.
Where's the ejection port cover?
Looks like a slick side upper receiver. No idea, but its not like that photo is large enough for everyone to see it easily. Then again, you can see the ejection port cover and the select fire markings for the M4...Originally Posted by mcantar18c
I was just about to post this, but figured it already was here. SURPRISED it doesn't have more posts here though. THIS IS exactly the link we need to be sending all our friends and also virally posting everywhere for uninformed people to read!!!
Send this link to everyone on the other side of the issue.
<Bump bump bump>
Nice.
Don't have a Facebook, so just had the wife to post it on hers.... that should be interesting.
I've got a few liberal friends who are totally ignorant about guns (go figure) so the above presentation has been shared with them in order to better educate them. I've also shared this on Facebook with the hope that it will get shared and even more people will get educated. As I've told my left-leaning friends, "If you want to debate based on the facts, I'm all for it. If, however, you want to tell me that my bone stock Ruger 10/22 shouldn't be banned but my 10/22 with the TAPCO Intrafuse stock should because it's an "assault rifle," we are never going to get anywhere because you're confusing cosmetics with capabilities which is a BIG problem." I used another picture from Ruger's recent press releases to explain the stupidity:
Obviously if the, "It only has to have one characteristic," clause in Fuckstein's bill passes, the above picture won't prove the point since the top 10/22 has a flash suppressor. However, I used the pic to display what would have, and what would not have, qualified as an "assault weapon" under the 1994 AWB so as to show what silliness resulted from emotion rather than logic the first time around.
Reposting to Facebook as well. Right after I posted that MrColionoir link!
I too am a little surprised more people haven't posted in this thread. I found it and thought I'd share because it IS simple and straight to the point. There is no filler, no fancy language and it even has PICTURES!
With that said, are there any other flaws with it that people see? Such as the missing ejection port cover and missing forward assist in the first picture.
Real nice link. Thanks for posting. This is going straight to FB.
"I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
- Clint Eastwood
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
