The Truth About Assault Weapons & High Capacity Magazines
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 сен 2024
- This video discusses the use and functions of rifle components named in assault weapon legislation as well as the fallacy of high-capacity magazines. I hope it can help others in the fight for our rights. Feel free to pass it along.
This is an expanded version of the video we produced for the Rhode Island Assault Weapons ban proposal. Additions to this version include forward vertical grips, barrel shrouds and details on the need for standard capacity magazines by law-abiding citizens.
Your common sense is epic and your arguments are very well made, This is added to my favorites even though the debate is over....for now...
It should be mandatory for all politicians to watch this video.
This is probably the BEST logical explanation of this subject I have ever seen! Bravo Sir, you are the man!
What would really be great is if everybody had the common sense to know all this anyway, great video
That was awesome! Should be required viewing for every federal and state legislature in our country!
The truth, it BURNS!
Thanks for making a great highly quality, educational video for those who are Armament Challenged.
Great video. The more we can get this out and educate people, the more the anti assault weapon crowd will see how silly the proposed laws are.
this is very well done, it's nice to see someone speaking with facts and logic as opposed to emotions when it comes to gun control.
Saw this in the GOAL newsletter and I have already posted it to my FB page and started sending the link out in emails. Send it to your representatives too. Can't hurt.
Many good points made in a calm manner. More videos like this are needed. People in favor of gun control won't listen to emotional rants. Excellent presentation!
Superb video. Thank you for taking the time to make it.
Very very very well done my friend! I will probably refer people who think that "assault weapons" should be banned to this video. Thanks a lot!
You know, I was pretty anti-assault weapons and high capacity magazines, but this video got me thinking and was very well done. I made me re-think my stance.
Here in California, our rifles need a bullet button which restricts changing magazines without the use of a tool (like a bullet to push the mag release). This, of course, was a step up from the guns we used to have, which was that the magazine was welded to the gun, and the gun must be taken apart each time it was to be reloaded.
Of course, none of this changes the fact that pistols don't have this restriction, so does nothing against mass shootings.
Absolutely suburb video with a thorough explanation of what the unknowledgeable gun ban supporters want to take away from law abiding citizens.
technically, the 1986 ban banned full autos: machine guns, smgs, and assault RIFLES.
"assault rifles" and "assault weapons" are vastly different.
"assault rifles" are: select-fire rifles, firing an intermediate round (bigger than a pistol, smaller than a full rifle).
"assault weapons," on the other hand, could best be described as: simple, semi-auto rifles that look scary.
Sharing. This needs more views.
The problem with the "cosmetic features only" argument is that it can be turned on its head. "If these features don't do anything, why do you need them?" And it's a good question. Truth is, many of these features make the weapons easier to shoot, and saying they don't alter functionality is almost meaningless. Guns with such features are easier to shoot by mass-killers. They are also easier to shoot by normal, law abiding people. I think the mag capacity argument was spot-on, though.
I would say in the context of mass shootings even if some of these features make the weapons easier to shoot which some indeed do like muzzle brakes it doesnt really matter in the least. In an environment of zero retaliation these people have free rein to do their atrocities. One issue here is how could a gun control activist objectively quantify that banning certain features save lives. Say a mass shooting happens and 10 people die and later another shooting happens with the same weapon but with a muzzle brake and 15 people were killed. How could they prove that it was simply the muzzle brake that led to more deaths and not something else? One could argue maybe there were more people in the area or the shooter was more competent with his weapon. Heck even people's reaction to the situation can be a major factor in deaths! My point is that these mass shootings you see don't boil down to features that may or may not make shooting more comfortable they boil down to terrible people preying on the defenseless. In my opinion the strongest argument gun control activists have here is against "high capacity" magazines which is easily defeated as demonstrated in the video and acknowledged by you in your comment. Finally I will say this WE are not the ones that have to justify ourselves here. Gun control activists have to do the justifying because they are the ones arguing that we should change laws. By the way I know this comment is 9 years old LOL. I'm just seeing it today and figured I would put my two cents worth. Also I'm running under the believe that you are pro-2A but playing "devil's advocate".
technically, not only are these features 99% cosmetic, several of them are either safety features, or accessibility features.
folding stocks make it easier for smaller-framed shooters to fire the gun.
if you've broken your right wrist several times (like, i dunno, ME) a pistol grip makes the recoil much more manageable. for example, i can shoot my AR-stocked shotgun all day. but shooting my traditional stock .30-06, despite the lower recoil, can get uncomfortable, fast.
Excellent video. Thank you.
Extremely well put. Thank you. I just posted it on my Facebook page.
with regard to grenade launchers buckshot and flechette rounds are also legal if its a registered DD
I would pay to see that!!!!!!!!!!
OUTSTANDING !!!!!!!!
@C. Pulchar why do we need them? Because we want them. They make our weapons unique to us. Why are you allowed to put shiny crome rims on your car? They don't affect the performance. Or why do you need a car that goes 180 miles an hour when the speed limit is 75 (maybe more or less). Wether they have no use or some one else may think I need them or not. If a teloscoping stock allows for either my self or my wife to shoot the same firearm comfortably why not. If a pistol grip and or a vertical
great vid David, Iv sent it on to friends. thanks Rich Newport Rifle Club
Great video! Thanks!
Spot on!
Hello Mr. Kenik. Strange question, but would you give me permission to distribute this video? No profit will come to me. This is a great video, and I'd like to get the information out there.
Oh no...not the evil brown rifle too! Great video.
Well put...
Fantastic video!
Well Put Brother Well Put👍
Fore grip allow for an enhanced postive control of weapon increasing accuracy why not?
Great video!
well said sir!
Awesome video
great video !
Thanks so much for making this clear.
You make a good point.
We should ban all guns.
I completely agree with everything this guy said.
Solid vid!
You da man!!
Well 4 years ago in Seattle a college kid wearing a Wehrmacht uniform and armed with a K98 rifle and fixed bayonet attempted to rush two Seattle Police Officers... Lets say the Glock 22s won that battle. That's the only crime with a bayo I know
The TRUTH is that they're STANDARD CAPACITY MAGAZINES and NOT "high capacity."
A weapon is only as deadly as the person wielding it. If someone has the intent to kill, and a bolt action rifle they will find a way (see Charles Whitman). And if they have a semi auto rifle or pistol and are confronted or chicken out, they take the coward's way out or are gunned down by a good guy. (See Clackamas mall, Arapahoe high) It isn't "assault weapons", it is people with the intention to commit assault. Taking guns from the law abiding does not solve the problem.
There's just too much fact and logic in this video.
reserve police officer? lol
great video!