+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Obama lies again (/showthread.php?tid=150811)
Re: Obama lies again - Mac-A-Matic - 04-05-2013
deckeda wrote:
Semi-automatic weapons are exceedingly good at assaulting, as one of your quotes above indicates. Hence the modern reference that doesn't ignore how they're used. Or perhaps I'm wrong and you really need those LCM's to conclusively take care of Bambi each season.
Sigh...
Looks as though you're of the same fiber as Feinstein and LaPierre - pick narrow slivers of the data to use for whatever your purpose may be.
Semi-auto weapons "exceedingly good at assaulting"??? Really demonstrates your lack of understanding the term "assault". Here are some online references for you:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault
deckeda wrote:
My question was clearly about what the President said, not about something I couldn't have known you were going to reply about instead. You're still drifting.
If you're going to say that the president and Senator Feinstein's goals in implementing a gun ban are not in cooperation with each other, then I can go along with what you're trying to say here. However, their goals are aligned and they are working together:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/24071/obama-supports-dianne-feinstein-assault-weapons-ban
deckeda wrote:
That FactCheck link was nevertheless interesting. I can include some quotes from it you neglected to include in your posts if you like, like ones that mentioned Feinstein's comments, "The study found 'clear indications that the use of assault weapons in crime did decline after the ban went into effect' and that assault weapons were becoming rarer as the years passed (this is the part of the study Feinstein seized on)."
Again, you, LaPierre and Feinstein are of the same character fabric - cherry picking passages. And this is glaringly so as you completely ignored the very first sentence of the article:
FactCheck.org wrote:
Both sides in the gun debate are misusing academic reports on the impact of the 1994 assault weapons ban, cherry-picking portions out of context to suit their arguments.
As I think any objective person would agree, the quotes from the Koper Report that I provided do not conclusively serve either the pro-gun or anti-gun side.
Re: Obama lies again - SDGuy - 04-05-2013
davester wrote:
This is a straw man without factual basis...
That such misrepresentations happen is indisputable. As for the intent? - well, that's open to interpretation...but why WOULD someone choose to perpetuate the myth that machine guns are easily obtainable?
davester wrote:
...most people don't know the difference, and in many cases the difference is pretty close to irrelevant when you consider that a handheld machine gun can only be fired in short bursts and is virtually equalled in killing power by a semiauto slightly modified to allow rapid fire.
? - speaking of ignorant masses - what, exactly, are the slight modifications you are speaking of? semiauto = pull the trigger, gun fires; pull the trigger rapidly = gun fires rapidly.
I don't think anyone would argue against the fact that a semiautomatic firearm can fire many bullets in a very short amount of time. For the purposes of this particular thread, though, the discussion is centered around the mischaracterization of such firearms as machine guns (which have been heavily controlled since 1934 - nearly 70 years, and for which no new ones have been introduced to civilians in the United States since 1986, approaching 30 years ago).
Intentionally or unintentionally framing the current debate as attempting to outlaw machine guns IS misleading, with the end result of swayed public opinion - the ignorant masses THINK machine guns are going to be outlawed, but have no clue what the law really is doing.
davester wrote:
...You are arguing semantics that are irrelevant.
It depends in what context the terminology is being used - folks having a casual conversation or discussion vs. being engaged in serious discourse about altering the laws of the land.
Re: Obama lies again - August West - 04-06-2013
...Which is exactly why Obama would drop in "automatic" and anti-gun wackos use "scary" words to frighten the populace.
Because 20 dead children weren't frightening enough.
Re: Obama lies again - Mac-A-Matic - 04-06-2013
August,
Nice self portrait but you really need a new hat.
Re: Obama lies again - Mac1337 - 04-06-2013
Obama only lies when his lips are moving.
Re: Obama lies again - SteveG - 04-06-2013
The Reaver wrote:
Obama only lies when his lips are moving.
The Reaver wrote:
Obama will mark in history the end of the good old days for America. Jimmy Carter on steroids with congressional support.
The Reaver wrote:http://forums.macresource.com/read.php?2,2663
Where is the great Furiously Stylish?
Did the sequester force you to fire your writers?