Poll of the Day > What is an "Assault weapon" and why should we ban it?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Rasmoh posted...

Revelation34 posted...

Oh you're trolling. Didn't realize it after the first post.

I'm not, you just literally have done nothing except say "People who think this are crazy!" while providing nothing to back that statement.

That's how the truth works. Also I never called anybody crazy in my first post when you gave the same exact reply.
---

Revelation34 posted...

That's how the truth works.

Why is it the truth though? What backing do you have to that statement? All it sounds like is a misguided opinion on your part.
---

Rasmoh posted...

Revelation34 posted...

That's how the truth works.

Why is it the truth though? What backing do you have to that statement? All it sounds like is a misguided opinion on your part.

Ignoring the 2nd part of that post just proves you're trolling.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Ignoring the 2nd part of that post just proves you're trolling.

Guess I'll be eternally waiting for you to explain your reasoning. Oh well.
---

Rasmoh posted...

Revelation34 posted...

Ignoring the 2nd part of that post just proves you're trolling.

Guess I'll be eternally waiting for you to explain your reasoning. Oh well.

I can't explain reasoning to a troll.
---

---

Police and Military are a mafia who are no more trustworthy with guns than any other citizens.

"Fighting a tyrannical government? You're crazy"

Not crazy. I have family who have seen tyranny first hand. Fighting the government is necessary sometimes. Just because you're a chickenshit doesn't mean everyone else is.

VioletZer0 posted...

Police and Military are a mafia who are no more trustworthy with guns than any other citizens.

"Fighting a tyrannical government? You're crazy"

Not crazy. I have family who have seen tyranny first hand. Fighting the government is necessary sometimes. Just because you're a chickenshit doesn't mean everyone else is.

This is why people stopped taking you seriously a long while back.
---

Are you people serious?

Okay, here's why rebellions succeed.

Infantry has been, and always shall be, the vast majority of warfare. The government may have things like airplanes, bombs, tanks, drones, warships, etc. but infantry will always define warfare. This is why the US lost Vietnam.

The people are at a distinct advantage. The US military may be large, but they're staring down 300 million people in the United States. If even just 1% took up arms with the vast supply of weapons in the US, that's 3 million soldiers that the police stare down.

Not only that, the people are the government's capital. Everyone killed in a civil war is a loss to the government. So even if you lose an engagement, you still win. George Washington knew this. That's why even tho almost every engagement in the Revolutionary War was a loss for the rebels, they still won.

That's not even getting into the fact that the military and police is filled with people who have friends and families back home who they may not be so keen on fighting.

Let's put it this way. Tyrannical governments spend a disproportionate amount of resources on propaganda and information control. If fighting the government was impossible, they wouldn't bother. They would just be like "You're all slaves but we have the power. Deal with it."

They fear the people's assembly. They fear free information.

I know just saying that seems weird but let me make one thing clear. I am not advocating for us to take arms right now...

But I want us to be prepared in case it comes to that. Instead of just hoping that the government doesn't go full tyranny.

Cacciato posted...

This is why people stopped taking you seriously a long while back.

---

What exactly is your plan when the government dismantles our rights and undergoes fascist transformation?

Are you just going to cower and comply while your people suffer and die?

Cacciato posted...

Cacciato posted...

This is why people stopped taking you seriously a long while back.

---

I'm the one that is actually saying something. Repeatedly quoting yourself with a nonsense phrase just makes it look like you have no argument.

VioletZer0 posted...

I'm the one that is actually saying something. Repeatedly quoting yourself with a nonsense phrase just makes it look like you have no argument.

Youre confusing saying something with saying something intelligent.
---

Cacciato posted...

VioletZer0 posted...

I'm the one that is actually saying something. Repeatedly quoting yourself with a nonsense phrase just makes it look like you have no argument.

Youre confusing saying something with saying something intelligent.

What I am saying has real life backing. Vietnam fought off the US in spite of being woefully under equipped compared to the US. Insurgents in the middle east are still kicking in spite of only being armed with cheap weaponry, trucks and IEDs.

VioletZer0 posted...

Are you people serious?

Okay, here's why rebellions succeed.

Infantry has been, and always shall be, the vast majority of warfare. The government may have things like airplanes, bombs, tanks, drones, warships, etc. but infantry will always define warfare. This is why the US lost Vietnam.

The people are at a distinct advantage. The US military may be large, but they're staring down 300 million people in the United States. If even just 1% took up arms with the vast supply of weapons in the US, that's 3 million soldiers that the police stare down.

Not only that, the people are the government's capital. Everyone killed in a civil war is a loss to the government. So even if you lose an engagement, you still win. George Washington knew this. That's why even tho almost every engagement in the Revolutionary War was a loss for the rebels, they still won.

That's not even getting into the fact that the military and police is filled with people who have friends and families back home who they may not be so keen on fighting.

Let's put it this way. Tyrannical governments spend a disproportionate amount of resources on propaganda and information control. If fighting the government was impossible, they wouldn't bother. They would just be like "You're all slaves but we have the power. Deal with it."

They fear the people's assembly. They fear free information.

I didn't know George Washington used assault weapons.
---

Revelation34 posted...

VioletZer0 posted...

Are you people serious?

Okay, here's why rebellions succeed.

Infantry has been, and always shall be, the vast majority of warfare. The government may have things like airplanes, bombs, tanks, drones, warships, etc. but infantry will always define warfare. This is why the US lost Vietnam.

The people are at a distinct advantage. The US military may be large, but they're staring down 300 million people in the United States. If even just 1% took up arms with the vast supply of weapons in the US, that's 3 million soldiers that the police stare down.

Not only that, the people are the government's capital. Everyone killed in a civil war is a loss to the government. So even if you lose an engagement, you still win. George Washington knew this. That's why even tho almost every engagement in the Revolutionary War was a loss for the rebels, they still won.

That's not even getting into the fact that the military and police is filled with people who have friends and families back home who they may not be so keen on fighting.

Let's put it this way. Tyrannical governments spend a disproportionate amount of resources on propaganda and information control. If fighting the government was impossible, they wouldn't bother. They would just be like "You're all slaves but we have the power. Deal with it."

They fear the people's assembly. They fear free information.

I didn't know George Washington used assault weapons.

Used the same weapons against the people he was fighting.

VioletZer0 posted...

What exactly is your plan when the government dismantles our rights and undergoes fascist transformation?

Are you just going to cower and comply while your people suffer and die?

Are you high? It's already an oligarchy. Nobody listened to Eisenhower.
---

You can fire an assault weapon while moving in the same turn with no penalty to hit.
---

Zareth posted...

You can fire an assault weapon while moving in the same turn with no penalty to hit.

You can also advance with only a small penalty
---

This is what happens when your replace war lessons in classroom with cowadooty at home.

If you got all your firearm knowledge from videogames, please dont use that as reason to assume your opinion on firearms means anything.
---

Zareth posted...

You can fire an assault weapon while moving in the same turn with no penalty to hit.

That's SMGs.

But assault weapons have lesser movement penalty.

VioletZer0 posted...

Zareth posted...

You can fire an assault weapon while moving in the same turn with no penalty to hit.

That's SMGs.

But assault weapons have lesser movement penalty.

Rapid Fire still gets a penalty for moving, and can't fire after advancing
---

oh I just noticed who the tc was

you should leave this board again dude
---

I never left :|

Lokarin posted...

Rapid Fire still gets a penalty for moving, and can't fire after advancing

You need to advance if you can also find cover in the same turn only.
---

Realtalk - the term Assault Weapon has no actual technical definition. The original Assault Rifles were precursors to SMGs because rifles were insufficient at raiding bunkers, but this has no modern world context.
---

Lokarin posted...

Realtalk - the term Assault Weapon has no actual technical definition. The original Assault Rifles were precursors to SMGs because rifles were insufficient at raiding bunkers, but this has no modern world context.

Are you talking about carbines?

Lokarin posted...

Realtalk - the term Assault Weapon has no actual technical definition. The original Assault Rifles were precursors to SMGs because rifles were insufficient at raiding bunkers, but this has no modern world context.

The first assault rifle was the German Stg.44 used in WW2. They are defined as select fire rifles that fire an intermediate cartridge and has a detachable magazine. Nothing more, nothing less. SMGs predate assault rifles by 40 years.
---

Btw: I get ma infos from this channel

https://youtu.be/z8aAXsJRzTM?t=4m12s
---

Also the Burton 1917 LMG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OGyJPFzNfU
---