Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

rvt1000rr

(40 posts)
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:40 PM Dec 2012

What, exactly, defines an assault weapon?

(A) The barrel length?
(B) A polymer stock?
(C) It's general appearance?
(D) The magazine capacity?

Item "D" is, by far, the most important factor. A proposal to limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 seems to be a reasonable.

Those (like the NRA) who say that this would not make a difference in mass shootings are wrong. Sure, the shooter can change mags, but after doing so, instead of 30 rounds being available, there would only be five.

No one needs a large capacity magazine. Period.

Thoughts?

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
1. I think we have to get beyond samantics here. People who do not care to own guns will never be as
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:08 PM
Dec 2012

specific in nomenclature as those who do own guns. That does not preclude a discussion or does not discount one side's opinion.

I think we all understand what went on in CT and most of us want to ban the types of weapons used there no matter what the exact definition is.

petronius

(26,603 posts)
5. In order to ban, limit, or restrict any type of weapon, a clear and specific definition
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:25 PM
Dec 2012

is necessary - that's the point of the OP, I think. It doesn't matter if they're called "assault weapons" (which in itself is a made-up term intended more for framing than any sort of clarity) or not, but what does matter is that specific features and characteristics are thoroughly and narrowly defined.

You can't ban "the types of weapons used there" without clearly delineating what the type is, which is what the original AWB - with all its silliness about military styling and scary black plastic rifles - failed to do...

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
8. In the debates we have here some use the fact that we can't define assault weapons as a reason
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:33 PM
Dec 2012

for not have any laws. We have to do what we can to cut down the number of these shootings which means we have to make a law that is as specific as we can but knowing we won't be exact enough to please the gun lobby.

Check out reply #3 for an example of what I mean. We have to bypass such a thinker and make our law anyway.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
9. You prove may point exactly. We will leave you out of the law making process because you
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:36 PM
Dec 2012

make your self irrelevant to the discussion.

 

guardian

(2,282 posts)
12. I am crushed that I won't have input.
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:39 PM
Dec 2012

Let me know when your bill has been submitted to the legislature.

andypandy

(47 posts)
4. cycling?
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:25 PM
Dec 2012

i can change the magazine on an assault rifle - go from the last round in magazine number one, to firing the first round in magazine number two - in two to three seconds. magazine size has little to do with the ability to fire, say, 30-odd rounds in two minutes or so - which is a shitload of dead people.

i would say the defining characteristics of a weapon suited to 'spree shootings' are being semi-automatic, having any magazine at all, and portablity.

personally i would suggest that your problem is far greater than the availability of this or that weapon - its the all pervading acceptance of violence endemic in American society. while few other countries suffer the US's comparative death toll, many have lots of weapons in legal circulation - which suggests that the problem is not with the guns (though why the fcuk anyone would think they 'need' a weapon in their own home is completely beyond me...), its the society that those who have them belong to.

Switzerland, for example, has several Assault rifles, capable of full automatic fire, in every street - yet the Swiss manage a firearms/homicide rate about 1/20th that of the US...

*my maths is pants, someone ought to check it - Switzerlands gun-related murder rate is 0.25 per 100,000, while the US's is 3.0 per 100,000. the UK's is 0.07 per 100,000.

Bandit

(21,475 posts)
10. What is the purpose of an Assault and how does one engage in such activity?
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:40 PM
Dec 2012

An Assault usually means a lot of suppressive firepower and that means rapid fire weapons. It also means lots of bullets being fired. A weapon that will hold lots of bullets and fire them very rapidly and is light weight enough to be hand carried easily usually can be described as an assault weapon...Light weight belt fed machine guns can also be classified as assault weapons as can most military issued rifles....The key is suppression...

ManiacJoe

(10,136 posts)
11. The definition depends on the fool writing the definition.
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:30 PM
Dec 2012

In the real world, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon". It is an unnecessary, artificial classification of guns usually defined by the cosmetic features (shape, looks) of the gun. Nothing in the usually definitions has to do with the functionality of the gun. The purpose of the phrase "assault weapon" is to confuse the masses into thinking about machine guns (assault rifles), which are never included in any of the usually definitions of "assault weapon". Magazine capacity is not an attribute of the gun for guns using detachable magazines.

farminator3000

(2,117 posts)
13. assault, offense, attack, all the same
Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:58 PM
Dec 2012

i'd ignore posts # 2,3,10 and 11 if i were you.

here's my idea: (8 round limit to make the gunners happy)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022077744

assault:
Also found in: Dictionary/thesaurus, Medical, Financial, Acronyms, Idioms, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia
At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

like walking around with a gun!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What, exactly, defines an...