Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
This is not going to bring these kids back and that’s all these families want
But it will save kids who haven't died yet — and that's all those families want, they just don't know it yet.
How long before the Supreme Court rules this unconstitutional? I fucking hate this country and it's love for guns.
Probably as fast as a lawsuit can be filed.
I'm not anti-guns. I'm pro-responsible ownership and reasonable restrictions. I don't hate 2A until it becomes the excuse that we can't fix anything.
I would suggest to 2A advocates that they become a bit less dogmatic in their "anything goes" interpretation. Because if 2A is a check on unreasonable regulation, that's fine. But if it prevents reasonable gun control laws, then it has to be repealed. Not that repealing it is going to happen any time soon, but we continue to build up Supreme Court decisions that prove 2A is broken and must go. Someday, all of these reasonable laws being struck down will be the justification for repeal. And they will be correct.
It won't do anything when you can just drive to the next state an buy your bazooka.
That's only true until it isn't. Plus, it's added friction. Yeah they still can, but will one person rethink things on their long drive? What about when it gets longer because the next state does something?
It's like vaccination. Inject one person and you've saved one person. Inject 80% of people and you've saved nearly everyone.
Fixing guns in this country will be the work of decades. And we should've started decades ago, but having failed in that, second best is starting now.
The Democrats are trying to disarm us as the Republicans build their neo-fascist state.
We're being screwed from both sides.
Under no pretext...
Oh, and from my cold, dead hands.
Melissa Hortman was shot with a Beretta 92 pistol. I skimmed the bill and I don't see anything that would have made his use or possession illegal if this law was already in place.
It does include grants for school safety and similar programs, though, which is good.
Can someone help me understand once and for all what an "assault style" weapon is? What makes an assault style weapon more deadly than a non assault style weapon?
Nothing. Assault style is nebulous and changes by state. Pistol grip on a rifle is the most common defining to-be banned feature I'd wager. Some bans also target stocks with multiple lengths, threaded barrels, or even 'barrel shrouds' sometimes defined as almost anything touching the barrel of the rifle that allows you to hold it by circumventing the heat of the barrel. Tldr mostly they're banning ergonomics.
Yeah I skimmed the bill. It's nearly identical to the 1992 AWB. We've had a similar law here in MA for years (though it just changed last year) and plenty of people still have AR and AK pattern rifles.
Can someone help me understand once and for all what an “assault style” weapon is?
So, "assault rifle" is kind a colloquial term. It's not an actual military category or designation as far as I know. But in a military context the type of gun that people commonly call an assault rifle is a type of light machine gun which shoots what's called an "intermediate round." That's a smaller caliber or lower power rifle round that is spicier and has a longer range than the pistol rounds that sub-machine guns shoot, but which are less spicy and easier to control than the bigger .30 caliber rifle rounds that regular full size machine guns shoot. It sort of splits the difference between two types of weapon to hopefully be more effective in a broader range of circumstances. AR platform rifles like M-16s and M-4s shoot a spiced up .22 caliber rifle round (.223 Remington/5.56 NATO), and AK platform rifles shoot a toned down .30 caliber rifle round with a shortened casing (7.62X39mm aka 7.62 Soviet).
The military version of these rifles are actual fully automatic machine guns, meaning that when on the full auto setting when you pull the trigger they will keep firing bullets until you let off the trigger again. That full-auto capability is pretty much the entire "assault" part of an assault rifle. And it's kind of the difference between military rifles and any other rifle. And even though they look virtually identical, the civilian versions of the same rifles are not capable of doing that. They're just regular semi-automatic rifles, which means they automatically re-cock themselves after each shot so you don't have cycle the gun's action manually, but each shot still requires a separate trigger pull. You can't just spray bullets like an action movie. They work the same as any traditional wooden-stock semi-auto hunting rifle that you'd use for hunting deer or elk.
What makes an assault style weapon more deadly than a non assault style weapon?
They're not. In terms of power and effective range they're pretty thoroughly outclassed by your average deer rifle. It's why they're so hard to ban. .223 Remington/5.56 NATO is one of the smallest center-fire rifle cartridges that's commonly available. If you banned every rifle that shot a larger or more powerful round you'd flat-out be banning most rifles, including the one grandpa goes hunting with every year. Since there aren't many legislators who are willing to try to take away PopPop's hunting rifle, most bans focus on cosmetic things like pistol grips or adjustable stocks instead of the actual capability of the gun. It all pretty much just comes down to vibes. Regardless of any evidence, people who have little or no firearms experience tend to just sort of assume "assault" rifles still must somehow be deadlier. Otherwise why would soldiers out fighting a war have the one and not the other, right? Plus, for most people, their entire knowledge of firearms comes from Hollywood movies and police procedurals, which means whatever they know about guns that isn't flat out wrong is probably wildly exaggerated. They've spent their whole lives watching guys on their TV with M-16s take down helicopters and blow up trucks just by shooting at them. On some gut level they feel like there must be some truth to it, and it's very difficult to convince them otherwise when they don't have any first-hand experience.