See here for why existing assault weapons bans are just pointless demagoguery. There is no functional difference between the assault version and non-assault version of the same rifle.

Comments

  1. #1 jyyh
    December 19, 2012

    (s) So, I could have a grenade launcher if I loaded the magazine of 100 rounds through the chamber?? (/s)

  2. #2 Kagehi
    December 19, 2012

    Hmm, interesting question. Maybe you would just have to remove the standard explosive that is designed to blow up tanks, and replace it with one that would only blow up people. That’s the ticket!

  3. #3 Matt Springer
    December 21, 2012

    If you’re actually curious, grenade launchers (being essentially a piece of pipe) are perfectly legal. Grenades themselves are very, very not.

  4. #4 SWT
    December 27, 2012

    I don’t get it. If, as my NRA-oriented friends keep reminding me, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”, why can’t I have grenades?

  5. #5 Gabriel
    Gainesville, FL
    December 27, 2012

    “Grenade Launchers” can also be “Line Launchers”
    Line Launchers or Line Throwers are often used to connect two ships during a replenishment at sea.

  6. #6 Mike
    USA
    December 28, 2012

    I think there is simple way to classify whether a firearm is an “assault weapon”. Define it like this: A firearm is a assault weapon if it can shoot more than N bullets in ten seconds. I am not sure what N should be, let’s say N=10 for now. This definition is based on functionality not how the weapon looks or how many times one needs to pull the trigger.

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!