Assault Rilfe Abuse Awareness (featureless rifles)

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

I just became aware of the inhumane manner in which some of our underprivileged Californian brethren are treating weapons. I wanted to post these pictures to raise awareness the lengths people will go to get around ridiculous legislation. These are “featureless rifles” ones that don’t have any of the evil features of an "assault weapon". Notice the lack of pistol grips. I also learned that few go this rout to comply with law, most install a bullet button to keep the look and feel of a “free state rifle” ß That’s actually what they call an normal weapon that’s available to people in most states.

I would like to say I’m not poking fun at California, I just really did find this mind boggling and wanted to let others know what can happen if you let idiots in office.

Edited August 4, 2012 by bigdaddyhatty

[thebuns1 4,323]

i think id just move.

[romad7 75]

i think id just move.

 

That's what I did, that state sucks!

[thebuns1 4,323]

i think id just move.

 

That's what I did, that state sucks!

you were wise my friend.

[22_Shooter 1,560]

Yeah, they're ugly. But the way I look at it, is this:

 

Some guys created those stocks, basically as a big giant "FUCK YOU!" to Cali law. "You want to ban certain features? Fine. We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons. Go fuck yourself!".

 

..........and that, is a beautiful thing.

 

For those still in Cali, keep fighting the good fight and in the mean time, legally skirt those bullshit laws as much as you can.

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

Yeah, they're ugly. But the way I look at it, is this:

 

Some guys created those stocks, basically as a big giant "FUCK YOU!" to Cali law. "You want to ban certain features? Fine. We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons. Go fuck yourself!".

 

..........and that, is a beautiful thing.

 

For those still in Cali, keep fighting the good fight and in the mean time, legally skirt those bullshit laws as much as you can.

 

"We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons" I agree, good on those guys who designed those stocks.

 

"You want to ban certain features? Fine." I strongly disagree, It's not FINE to ban features that allow you to keep up with the criminals.

 

I know you probably didn't mean that bans were ok, I'm just sayin....

[22_Shooter 1,560]

Yeah, they're ugly. But the way I look at it, is this:

 

Some guys created those stocks, basically as a big giant "FUCK YOU!" to Cali law. "You want to ban certain features? Fine. We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons. Go fuck yourself!".

 

..........and that, is a beautiful thing.

 

For those still in Cali, keep fighting the good fight and in the mean time, legally skirt those bullshit laws as much as you can.

 

"We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons" I agree, good on those guys who designed those stocks.

 

"You want to ban certain features? Fine." I strongly disagree, It's not FINE to ban features that allow you to keep up with the criminals.

 

I know you probably didn't mean that bans were ok, I'm just sayin....

 

You're right. That's not what I meant.

 

As a resident of NYS, which still basically has the old '94-'04 Clinton ban in place..............bans of any kind are not OK in my book.

[patriot 7,197]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

[mogunner 240]

Those mags look like they hold more than ten rounds...

[U.S. Pratorean 1,234]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

Or how about semi auto-matic assault rifle or assault pistol! Makes about as much sense as a logical liberal.

[patriot 7,197]

Careful, or I'll use my ASSAULT FONT on you!

[mancat 2,368]

Yeah, they're ugly. But the way I look at it, is this:

 

Some guys created those stocks, basically as a big giant "FUCK YOU!" to Cali law. "You want to ban certain features? Fine. We'll skirt it, and still have effective (even if ugly) weapons. Go fuck yourself!".

 

..........and that, is a beautiful thing.

 

For those still in Cali, keep fighting the good fight and in the mean time, legally skirt those bullshit laws as much as you can.

 

Which is where idiots like Leland Yee come in. Yee claimed that stocks such as these, as well as bullet buttons, should be illegal because they "violate the intention of the law." The intention of course was to rid California of all military-style rifles. They don't care if the rifles are legal as-is. They will continue to amend the law to chip away until they are all banned, making criminals out of California citizens.

 

Of course Leland Yee is also known to be a fan of whores. Has not stopped his political ambitions or credibility.

 

I was offered to relocate for a job in CA and said no, no way in hell. I flew in on a semi-weekly basis instead.

 

 

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

This instantly brings to mind the orgins of karate in Okinaowa. The Fuedial Emperors forbade farmers/peasants from owning weapons so after years of being raped/robbed by the enforcing samurai soldiers the villagers learned to use farming impliments as effective weapons against the heavily armored sword/spear wielding and offten horse mounted samurai.

It's just another example of absolute power being abused, and the will to survive finding a way.

[Superhawk138 202]

So glad I left that state.

[U.S. Pratorean 1,234]

...

 

Careful, or I'll use my ASSAULT FONT on you!

They are working on banning that too, bro. The children, think of the children!

Edited August 4, 2012 by U.S Praetorian

[patriot 7,197]

...

 

Careful, or I'll use my ASSAULT FONT on you!

They are working on banning that too, bro. The children, think of the children!

 

Jerry thinks of the children, and look where that got him!

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

[patriot 7,197]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

 

By using the terminology of the gun-banners, you're fighting their fight for them.

 

I'm done here. I don't want to annoy the fish.

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

 

By using the terminology of the gun-banners, you're fighting their fight for them.

 

I'm done here. I don't want to annoy the fish.

 

Chill out man, I wasn't trying to start a fight. I was just saying plenty of people in the gun community use the term "assault weapon" when refering to military style weapons, I understand the differnece, but it doesn't matter to gun banners, if you did convince everyone in the country that an AR-15 is not an assault rife they would just call it a military style weapon ban. I'll change the thread to say "weapon" vs. Assault Rifle so I don't seem uneducated.

Edited August 4, 2012 by bigdaddyhatty

[Darko 42]

those are....interesting? good for them though! its a shame they have to go to such lengths to own these weapons...

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

 

By using the terminology of the gun-banners, you're fighting their fight for them.

 

I'm done here. I don't want to annoy the fish.

 

Chill out man, I wasn't trying to start a fight. I was just saying plenty of people in the gun community use the term "assault weapon" when refering to military style weapons, I understand the differnece, but it doesn't matter to gun banners, if you did convince everyone in the country that an AR-15 is not an assault rife they would just call it a military style weapon ban. I'll change the thread to say "weapon" vs. Assault Rifle so I don't seem uneducated.

And it's the job of the informed to educate them. Otherwise your just a sheep waiting to be converted. Part of the problem or part of the solution. It's like saying "they haven't banned them yet so it won't ever happen. Not a wise philosophy at all.

[VR762Shooter 838]

People tell me I have assault-weapons, and I say I have rifles. Everytime theres a news report about something gun related in this state its "and a military style assault-weapon....." then it ends up being a bolt gun or a 10/22 and it makes me sick. They arent even defined by the crooked politicians as an assault-weapon and they call these guns them anyway. So I just educate who I can and move on, its an uphill battle in our states (AWB states)

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

 

By using the terminology of the gun-banners, you're fighting their fight for them.

 

I'm done here. I don't want to annoy the fish.

 

Chill out man, I wasn't trying to start a fight. I was just saying plenty of people in the gun community use the term "assault weapon" when refering to military style weapons, I understand the differnece, but it doesn't matter to gun banners, if you did convince everyone in the country that an AR-15 is not an assault rife they would just call it a military style weapon ban. I'll change the thread to say "weapon" vs. Assault Rifle so I don't seem uneducated.

And it's the job of the informed to educate them. Otherwise your just a sheep waiting to be converted. Part of the problem or part of the solution. It's like saying "they haven't banned them yet so it won't ever happen. Not a wise philosophy at all.

People tell me I have assault-weapons, and I say I have rifles. Everytime theres a news report about something gun related in this state its "and a military style assault-weapon....." then it ends up being a bolt gun or a 10/22 and it makes me sick. They arent even defined by the crooked politicians as an assault-weapon and they call these guns them anyway. So I just educate who I can and move on, its an uphill battle in our states (AWB states)

 

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

Edited August 5, 2012 by bigdaddyhatty

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

No no no. We're playing the "we know what our guns are " game.

Nobody will argue that the 2nd amendment is for anything other than fighting tyrany by the civilan. Anybody who claims otherwise hasn't read it. Period. Or are lying. By not calling our semi automatic weapons assult weapons we are simply trying to clearify that assult weapons are already heavily regulated and further regulation isn't required because the weapons commerciall availble don't fit that definition. PERIOD.

[Wolverine 10,360]

NOT an assault rifle!

 

An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine, not to be confused with so called assault weapons.[1] Assault rifles are the standard infantry weapons in most modern armies. Assault rifles are categorized in between light machine guns, which are intended more for sustained automatic fire in a light support role, and submachine guns, which fire a pistol cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.

 

It depends on where you get your definition. I gave up on the definition above. "The indiscriminate use of the term 'assault rifle' in the Unites States has caused it to mean any wepon that looks like an assault rifle {high capacity magazine} and fires something bigger than a pistol round" -Duncan Long. Your not going to educate the whole country into the puriest's definition, so you may as well just go with it. The introduction to Assault Pistols, Rifles, and Submachine Guns he challenges the pureist definition of the term with history of the first "assault rifles".

 

By using the terminology of the gun-banners, you're fighting their fight for them.

 

I'm done here. I don't want to annoy the fish.

 

Chill out man, I wasn't trying to start a fight. I was just saying plenty of people in the gun community use the term "assault weapon" when refering to military style weapons, I understand the differnece, but it doesn't matter to gun banners, if you did convince everyone in the country that an AR-15 is not an assault rife they would just call it a military style weapon ban. I'll change the thread to say "weapon" vs. Assault Rifle so I don't seem uneducated.

And it's the job of the informed to educate them. Otherwise your just a sheep waiting to be converted. Part of the problem or part of the solution. It's like saying "they haven't banned them yet so it won't ever happen. Not a wise philosophy at all.

People tell me I have assault-weapons, and I say I have rifles. Everytime theres a news report about something gun related in this state its "and a military style assault-weapon....." then it ends up being a bolt gun or a 10/22 and it makes me sick. They arent even defined by the crooked politicians as an assault-weapon and they call these guns them anyway. So I just educate who I can and move on, its an uphill battle in our states (AWB states)

 

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

 

It would seem Justice Scalia may not agree with you. He has opened the door to further restrictions upon SC review. Good luck with that argument.

[VR762Shooter 838]

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

 

Since you arent from an AWB state, you cant know what the fight here is. We arent just fighting to keep our "assault weapons" we are fighting to keep ANY. If it takes having to re-educate these morons one person at a time thats how we have to do it. But to try and win the war by just going from "this isnt an assault weapon" to "I should be able to carry a full-auto" wont win any fights. These people dont want any guns. Telling them you should have a full-auto typically just adds fuel to their fire.

[bigdaddyhatty 65]

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

 

Since you arent from an AWB state, you cant know what the fight here is. We arent just fighting to keep our "assault weapons" we are fighting to keep ANY. If it takes having to re-educate these morons one person at a time thats how we have to do it. But to try and win the war by just going from "this isnt an assault weapon" to "I should be able to carry a full-auto" wont win any fights. These people dont want any guns. Telling them you should have a full-auto typically just adds fuel to their fire.

 

I understand you are in a bad position, but like you said "these people don't want any guns" which is the real problem, not the lable assault weapon.

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

 

Since you arent from an AWB state, you cant know what the fight here is. We arent just fighting to keep our "assault weapons" we are fighting to keep ANY. If it takes having to re-educate these morons one person at a time thats how we have to do it. But to try and win the war by just going from "this isnt an assault weapon" to "I should be able to carry a full-auto" wont win any fights. These people dont want any guns. Telling them you should have a full-auto typically just adds fuel to their fire.

 

I understand you are in a bad position, but like you said "these people don't want any guns" which is the real problem, not the lable assault weapon.

The "assult" lable exisit merely to inspire fear and give a perception that these particular rifles can only be used for offensive purpose. And therefore is very damaging in it's influence to those who maybe on the fence, if they don't believe that the right to bear arms is still necessary to the preservation of our other basic freedoms. Ignorant as that/they maybe they still get to vote unfortunately.

[VR762Shooter 838]

I am not "using the gun-banners terminology and fighting thier fight for them"!!!! You guys are make mute points that your guns are not assault weapons! The second ammendment protects YOUR right for you to own ASSAULT WEAPONS (REAL DEAL, BY THE LETTER, FULL AUTO ASSAULT WEAPONS!) so when they say they want to ban assault weapons and you say your guns are not assault weapons YOU'RE PLAYING THE GUN BANNERS GAME, NOT ME! The agrument should't be "well assault weapons should be banned by mine are not assult weapons", it should be "I have the right to bear ARMS! ARMS, not rilfes as long as they are not assault rifles, not sporting goods, ARMS (Whatever I think I need to defend myself against criminals and tyranny!)

 

Since you arent from an AWB state, you cant know what the fight here is. We arent just fighting to keep our "assault weapons" we are fighting to keep ANY. If it takes having to re-educate these morons one person at a time thats how we have to do it. But to try and win the war by just going from "this isnt an assault weapon" to "I should be able to carry a full-auto" wont win any fights. These people dont want any guns. Telling them you should have a full-auto typically just adds fuel to their fire.

 

I understand you are in a bad position, but like you said "these people don't want any guns" which is the real problem, not the lable assault weapon.

 

Well the people who vote listen to things stated by media and governors (current presidential candidates) and believe "assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people." We here now are just trying to change the perception of what these guns truely are, so we can move on to other issues the anti's use against 2A

[tatonic 159]

The gov would use assault weapons on us.