Dems Sit in Silence as Witness Debunks Their 'Assault' Rifle Lies (video)

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,312
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,575.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Wow this is some video! The Heritage Foundation witness covers a lot of facts etc. that I'm familiar with. The drive to ban so called "Assault rifles" is largely based on the most sensationalistic cases and does not in any way really represent what is actually used in the bulk of crimes committed etc. (Unfortunately, the only guns I own, namely handguns are really the ones that would be regulated if lawmakers were really serious on the issue rather than purely making public relations points)

I found the stat that you are "4 times more likely to be stabbed to death", as shot to death by a rifle an interesting statistic.

I thought the witnesses personal story about her mother also very good.


 
  • Winner
Reactions: Darkhorse

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,021
23,929
Baltimore
✟551,662.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Your headline is absurd. They were "sitting in silence" because it was the woman's turn to speak; not because they were stunned or embarassed.

Personal defense weapon

...is a specific category of weapon that, despite the name, doesn't necessarily indicate its appropriateness for home defense. It's sort of a submachine gun that fires a small rifle round.
Personal defense weapon - Wikipedia

Her conflation of police utility and home utility is dishonest.

Americans use firearms to defend themselves between 500,000 and two million times every year

Nobody has accurate data on that and that high end is absurd on its face. Two million times every year averages out to one out of every 150 people (including children) per year. Do a quick poll of your Facebook friends and see how many have ever used a gun to defend themselves outside of some kind of military or law enforcement capacity. Most of us have a couple hundred FB friends, so you should be able to find, on average, at least two people who've done so every year.

She's correct that the threat of assault rifles is overblown and that most of the risk is from handguns, but when Dems tried to go after handguns in the 80s and 90s, conservatives fought that, too. Her argument is disingenuous.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Your headline is absurd. They were "sitting in silence" because it was the woman's turn to speak; not because they were stunned or embarassed.
...is a specific category of weapon that, despite the name, doesn't necessarily indicate its appropriateness for home defense. It's sort of a submachine gun that fires a small rifle round.
Personal defense weapon - Wikipedia
Her conflation of police utility and home utility is dishonest.
Nobody has accurate data on that and that high end is absurd on its face. Two million times every year averages out to one out of every 150 people (including children) per year. Do a quick poll of your Facebook friends and see how many have ever used a gun to defend themselves outside of some kind of military or law enforcement capacity. Most of us have a couple hundred FB friends, so you should be able to find, on average, at least two people who've done so every year.
She's correct that the threat of assault rifles is overblown and that most of the risk is from handguns, but when Dems tried to go after handguns in the 80s and 90s, conservatives fought that, too. Her argument is disingenuous.
Wiki is about as reliable as the scribbling on a public facility wall and you misrepresented it. A sub-machine gun is a fully automatic firearm. It continues to fire as long as the trigger is depressed until the trigger is released or it runs out of ammunition.
So-called "assault weapons" are semi-automatic. They fire one bullet with each trigger pull. The trigger must be released and pulled again to fire another bullet. Other types require a separate action to load another cartridge such as a lever action, think "Rifleman."or bolt action.
So-called "assault rifles" not necessary for personal/home defense? As long as criminals use such weapons, with seeming impunity, homeowners are justified in owning them. Gun laws have virtually no impact on the possession of guns by criminal elements.
 
Upvote 0

jgarden

Senior Veteran
Jan 1, 2004
10,695
3,181
✟106,405.00
Faith
Methodist
murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used.jpg


Dems Sit in Silence as Witness Debunks Their 'Assault' Rifle Lies (video)

Amy Swearer and the Heritage Foundation must graduated with honors from the Donald J Trump "School of Fact Checking!"

According to the FBI, homicides attributed to "knives or cutting instruments" rank a distant 3rd behind "handguns" and "firearms, type not stated!"

When "rifles," "shotguns" and "other guns" are added to that total, it brings the firearms related homicides to over 10,000 in 2018 - as compared to 1,515 attrubuted to knives!

Homicides caused by knives is 15% of the number caused by firearms - Americans have approximately a 7X greater chance of being killed by a firearm versus a knife!


The Heritage Foundation, the gun lobby and their supporters are in no position to "gloat" about putting Democrats in their place - after 4 years of Trump, liberals have grown accustomed to conservatives who can never get their facts straight!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Wiki is about as reliable as the scribbling on a public facility wall and you misrepresented it. A sub-machine gun is a fully automatic firearm. It continues to fire as long as the trigger is depressed until the trigger is released or it runs out of ammunition.
So-called "assault weapons" are semi-automatic. They fire one bullet with each trigger pull. The trigger must be released and pulled again to fire another bullet. Other types require a separate action to load another cartridge such as a lever action, think "Rifleman."or bolt action.
So-called "assault rifles" not necessary for personal/home defense? As long as criminals use such weapons, with seeming impunity, homeowners are justified in owning them. Gun laws have virtually no impact on the possession of guns by criminal elements.
Also, you don't want to get by with the bare minimum in a defense situation.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Also, you don't want to get by with the bare minimum in a defense situation.
Guns are not the problem, people are the problem. I have owned guns since 1954. I have one firearm I have owned since '59, one since '66 and 2 more within the past 3-4 years. If firearms are so dangerous why haven't any of mine got up and shot somebody?
The one I bought in '66 is a replica 1851 Navy Colt cap and ball. Fun to shoot but can't hit the broad side of a barn.
upload_2020-9-29_20-0-35.png
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

jgarden

Senior Veteran
Jan 1, 2004
10,695
3,181
✟106,405.00
Faith
Methodist
Guns are not the problem, people are the problem. I have owned guns since 1954. I have one firearm I have owned since '59, one since '66 and 2 more within the past 3-4 years. If firearms are so dangerous why haven't any of mine got up and shot somebody?
The one I bought in '66 is a replica 1851 Navy Colt cap and ball. Fun to shoot but can't hit the broad side of a barn.
View attachment 285413
Actually, guns do kill people, according to a new study

Analyzing data on hundreds of shootings in Boston from 2010 to 2014, Anthony Braga of Northeastern University and Philip J. Cook of Duke University found that on a bullet-per-bullet basis, shootings committed with a large-caliber firearm are much more likely to result in a fatality than those with a smaller-caliber gun. Caliber is a measure of the diameter of the bullets fired by a particular gun.

"The implication,” they write, “is that if the medium- and large-caliber guns had been replaced with small caliber (assuming everything else unchanged) the result would have been a 39.5% reduction in gun homicides” in Boston during the study period.

The results undercut the idea that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” That catchy turn of phrase is often used by gun rights supporters to emphasize the human role in gun violence rather than the gun itself. The idea is that the gun matters a lot less than the murderous intent of the person pulling the trigger. If the person matters more than the gun, in other words, it’s better to focus policy on people than to regulate guns.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/07/27/actually-guns-do-kill-people-according-new-study/

************************************************************************************
Firearms, particularly handguns, are the weapons of choice in America when it comes to homicides - they were responsible for 6,603 of the over 10,000 gun related deaths in 2018, followed by knives at 1,515!

The calibre of firearms is part pf the problem - the 10,000+ deaths annually could be reduced to 6,000 just be eliminating access to large and middle calibre guns!
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Guns are not the problem, people are the problem. I have owned guns since 1954. I have one firearm I have owned since '59, one since '66 and 2 more within the past 3-4 years. If firearms are so dangerous why haven't any of mine got up and shot somebody?
The one I bought in '66 is a replica 1851 Navy Colt cap and ball. Fun to shoot but can't hit the broad side of a barn.
View attachment 285413
I don't know if there's a misunderstanding but I like guns and I would support the Second Amendment if I lived in the USA.

That 1851 Navy Colt is beautiful although I always thought they weren't as inaccurate as people assume? Or did you mean difficult to shoot well?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,021
23,929
Baltimore
✟551,662.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Wiki is about as reliable as the scribbling on a public facility wall and you misrepresented it. A sub-machine gun is a fully automatic firearm. It continues to fire as long as the trigger is depressed until the trigger is released or it runs out of ammunition.
So-called "assault weapons" are semi-automatic. They fire one bullet with each trigger pull. The trigger must be released and pulled again to fire another bullet. Other types require a separate action to load another cartridge such as a lever action, think "Rifleman."or bolt action.


I’m familiar with the difference. I misrepresented nothing. The woman in the video took the “personal defense weapon” classification and misconstrued it as somehow being relevant to home defense. It has a more specific, technical meaning than what she implied.

So-called "assault rifles" not necessary for personal/home defense?

Not really, no. The weapons are too long and the rounds over-penetrate for use in an interior, residential space.

As long as criminals use such weapons, with seeming impunity, homeowners are justified in owning them.

Who said anything about “justified”?

Gun laws have virtually no impact on the possession of guns by criminal elements.

And yet the countries with strict laws have less gun crime.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I don't know if there's a misunderstanding but I like guns and I would support the Second Amendment if I lived in the USA.
That 1851 Navy Colt is beautiful although I always thought they weren't as inaccurate as people assume? Or did you mean difficult to shoot well?
The rear sight is a rectangular notch in the hammer and can only be in position when the hammer is cocked. When one pulls the trigger the sight, of course, disappears. Gen Patton once said about the 1911A1 "It was very accurate .....inside a crowded elevator." That's the 1851 Navy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dansiph

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2018
1,349
1,001
UK
✟119,794.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The rear sight is a rectangular notch in the hammer and can only be in position when the hammer is cocked. When one pulls the trigger the sight, of course, disappears. Gen Patton once said about the 1911A1 "It was very accurate .....inside a crowded elevator." That's the 1851 Navy.
I don't know, I've seen people be really accurate with a 1911. It's not a rifle but in the right hands it can hit targets at a good distance.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0