I have known the distinction between semi-auto and fully automatic weapons since 5th grade. That is practically a detail compared to my various larger points. I was not talking about hand guns. But, there are semi-auto except single action would be more analogous to a quick bolt action, or a pump,or lever action than a semi-auto. Plus there are match single action hand guns, even multiple barrel hand guns. Again, I wanted to KISS and deal with only long guns. I have no problem with the 2nd amendment, so barely mentioned it. I would not define a tomahawk as an assault weapon no more than some kung fu artists hands. But, thanks for your input!

https://media.giphy.com/media/H5Ag5S...wlQ1/giphy.gif

A gun that shoots a bullet at less than the speed of sound can be effectively silenced. I believe that it was not too long ago that anyone could buy armour-piercing bullets. There are plenty around. But, I had many, many valid points.

But in it's day it was a fearsome weapon and even today in the hands of a capable individual it is still a deadly device. To qualify as a "mass shooting" it only requires 3 people to be killed or injured. In a crowded environment such as a mall or school even an average person could kill or severely injure 3 people with a tomahawk. So is it not an assault weapon?

You are right about body armour only blocking most pistol rounds. I could have come up with a larger list of why hunting rifles and the normally defined military style long gun are different animals. My main point was that a dedicated hunter would have zero need to carry those added weight, unnecessary items with them. It is just a "Rambo" mentality.

The lawsuit has nothing to do with sensible or nonsensible gun ownership. The lawsuit has nothing to do with gun ownership at all. The lawsuit has nothing to do with guns. Or the Second Amendment. At all.

AT
ALL

The lawsuit is about a particular lobby group that serves manufacturers of a particular product, taking money from individual members for dues, while those members may or may not work for those manufacturers, and that lobby group subsequently skims the dues money and other donations to use on things that have nothing to do with the supposed purpose of the organization.

Now, that might not be a horrible crime, to some of you. It is to me. But to make matters worse, this organization has non-profit status under the tax code. Which is to say - it is tax-exempt. They benefit from dues that don't necessarily go to the thing they claim should be tax exempt.

Tax exemption is based on a very strict set of criteria. They have violated that set of criteria - supremely. So they're cheating the government, they're cheating members, they're cheating pretty much everyone, including the manufacturers who "donate" millions to them every year to politically support those manufacturers as a lobby.

If it was widgets that was the product - if it's Doritos. If it's KFC. If it's the cannibis growers foundation. If it's the black shoelace coalition.

Whatever the product is...

this organization exists, at this point in history, to support the manufacture of the product. It has no care for its membership, the individuals who actually pay to be members of it. This is proven by the fact that they have skimmed millions and used that membership money for things that have nothing to do with helping members with anything at all.

That is what this lawsuit is about.

No, not without severely stretching the normal modern definition of "assault weapon". If someone massages words and definitions enough they can TRY to justify anything.

Actually no, that is not true. The function of the CDC is to assist in the prevention of health, safety, and security risks. Gun violence falls under the last two categories. Subsequent death as a result of gun violence would fall under the first two categories.

No but the NRA (which is what this topic is about, NOT 2A) was founded to support hunters, not human-killers.

Just like the anti gun element that severely stretches the definition of an assault weapon and "massages words and definitions".

People with no knowledge of firearms shouldn't comment about firearms.

There are no such things as "silencers". The technical term is "Sound Suppressor". As the name suggests, it suppresses the sound. It surely doesn't silence it. Even with a suppressor it's recommended that you still wear hearing protection. The only place you can truly silence the report of a firearm is in the movies.

And what in the hell is a Banana Clip? Is that something you attach to your banana to accelerate its ripening? If you're referring to those pesky things that hold those scary bullets, those are called magazines..

Please people.. Know something about a subject before you make an ass of yourselves.

Wow! Nothing of your statement is correct.

Clubs, knives, guns, bricks, rebar, iron pipe, and anything else used to kill or injure a person is an assault weapon. If you intentionally injure or kill someone it is an assault. We don't have a gun, knife or bludgeon violence problem in this country, we have a violence problem and that is what needs to be addressed.

I give up. It is like talking to petulant 3 year olds who just whine all the time because they want something other people have. Good luck with your efforts in this thread.

So I guess this: Wasn't the result of a petulant 3-year-old who whines all the time because they want something other people have.

Here's a clue: you were wrong. Nothing in your statement had any basis in truth. You corrected me with a total fabrication that even the NRA's own website doesn't mention.

And - the oldest civil rights organization in the USA was the American Colonization Society, founded in 1816 as an instrumental branch of the abolitionist movement. The NRA wasn't founded until 55 years later, in 1871.

Sadly - the NRA no longer stands for what it was founded to stand for, it no longer supports what it was founded to support, and it no longer acts in the best interests of its members. Instead, it steals from them. Which is the purpose of the lawsuit against them - to determine damages and enforce consequences.