|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 3, 2013 7:21:50 GMT -6
Ok our Administration doesn't want legal Americans to own so called assult weapons yet here is what is being proposed for Syrian rebels.
U.S. officials said the administration could provide the rebels with a range of weapons, including small arms, ammunition, assault rifles and a variety of anti-tank weaponry such as shoulder-fired remote-propelled grenades and other missiles. However, a final decision on the inventory has not been made, the officials said.
Most of those would be weapons the opposition forces could easily use and not require much additional training to operate. Obama’s opposition to deploying American troops to Syria makes it difficult to provide much large-scale training. Other smaller- scale training can be done outside Syria’s borders.
All of the officials insisted on anonymity in order to discuss internal administration discussions.
DO we call this a double standard? Legal law abiding Americans aren't to own such weapons but a militant group we will give them crates full? Just food for thought?.......
|
|
|
Post by mostinterestingmanintheworld on Sept 3, 2013 9:39:18 GMT -6
Nutritious food too.
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Sept 3, 2013 21:23:56 GMT -6
I think it is a very over stated statement to say that our current administration does not want legal citizens like myself to own a firearm. Most of the statements I read from gun activists states that armed citizens are safer and you want us to not help Syrian citizens to arm themselves and become more safe. Now that is the double standard in my opinion.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Sept 3, 2013 22:08:07 GMT -6
"Legal law abiding Americans aren't to own such weapons but a militant group we will give them crates full.."
Our legal law abiding citizens could probably arm militant groups with all the firepower they have socked away.
Pam
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 4, 2013 16:17:51 GMT -6
Bruce WOW your making some real turn of words LOL.
It isn't firearms the President is quoted as saying Assault weapons that is a fact. He wants and his buddy from California also no legal ownership of a long list they and she sees as assault weapons those are facts.
Secondly who are we arming in Syria? These aren't average Joe citizens they want to give arms to, we both know that as well.
Pam why would any legal Americans arm militant groups? So that is justification to limit gun ownership? Really? I own my share of firearms and wouldn't give them a BB gun............... Allow them to get their weapons more local, keep,our US stuff for US and true ally use period.
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Sept 4, 2013 19:44:54 GMT -6
First of all it is Bryce not Bruce that is my cousin! LOL And the definition of Assult type weapon has not been clearly defined. Sure we don't know the background of thousands of Syrians and neither do we know the background of millions of US citizens either.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Sept 4, 2013 23:28:33 GMT -6
I'd bet the Federal govt. would provide those weapons to US citizens in the event of an invasion to help repel such an invasion.................... They did it in WW2 here in CA, and OR, WA & AK for fear of a Japanese invase of the US mainland.. The guns have been removed from most locations but there were artillery pieces manned largely by citizens along the coast, you can still find the concrete emplacements. And they were passing out Springfield 03A3's, the 'assault rifle' of its time............
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Sept 4, 2013 23:33:02 GMT -6
An interesting sidenote, I'm currently sitting just a few miles from the location that was shelled by a Japanese submarine in 1942.
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Sept 5, 2013 1:03:14 GMT -6
"Pam why would any legal Americans arm militant groups?"
I was being sarcastic. I thought it a bit ironic that US citizens have more firepower in their own homes than those at war. IMHO the only reason to have assault weapons is assault. If US soil was in danger of being invaded I'd bet the gov't would also furnish arms as FWS says they did in WWI.
Cheers Pam
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 5, 2013 5:12:03 GMT -6
Really you both want to bring up what took place in WW II versus debate the double standard by this admin? LOL.
Pam an assault rifle is a term or phrase to,describe a firearm, a poor one at best. Any firearm could be used to assault in all,reality. Most crimes take place with hand guns not so called assault rifles. Many people use ar platform guns for sport shooting and yes even hunting. Without a proper,license or paper work being done an AR,black rifle what ever your phrase of the day is simply a semi automatic rifle with a shortened barrel, although many more popular styles include heavy barrels with more modern hunting length barrels on them.
WE will be glad to give though our military type service rifles that are fully auto with burst round capability to a militant sort in a foreign country LOL.
So we can pass out rifles and large artillery during times of war, but during times of peace as legal Americans we can't be trusted with other forms smaller caliber in many cases and only semi auto,function as legal Americans? Good argument LOL.
|
|
|
Post by musher on Sept 5, 2013 6:40:48 GMT -6
"Pam why would any legal Americans arm militant groups?" I was being sarcastic. I thought it a bit ironic that US citizens have more firepower in their own homes than those at war. IMHO the only reason to have assault weapons is assault. If US soil was in danger of being invaded I'd bet the gov't would also furnish arms as FWS says they did in WWI. Cheers Pam Perhaps the reason why no U.S. government has tried any of the dictatorial abuses seen in the middle east is because US citizens have so much fire power. Like it or not, you guys are bombing Syria. You are backed into a corner. You can't say you are the world power and the enforcer of basic principles (such as speaking out against weapons of mass destruction) and then not back such statements without losing face. 50% of you are against it according to Canadian news articles. That never stopped you before and it won't now. It will just shorten the length of time the bombing will last.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Sept 5, 2013 7:26:10 GMT -6
because of countrys like Canada, that fall under the US protection umbrella, is why we have stockpiles of waepons- and they sit back and let us take care of things
no disrepect, just a fact of life
as far as a double standard, I think its highly ironic, that the one debating a double standard, is the one that most obviously HAS one
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Sept 5, 2013 8:31:31 GMT -6
Sure, why not ? The circumstance and type of weaponry you listed was already illegal for a citizen to own, except for registered Class 3 automatic firearms. If the US mainland was under attack by forces using aircraft and armored vehicles citizens would probably have anti tank weapons and surface to air missiles like Stingers, made available. A term which was brought into use in the US by the firearms industry as a marketing tool......... The Most Wanted Gun in AmericaThe Germans had an invasion plan for the US in WW1 and WW2, they'd have failed if they tried. No, Canada has been there with us, and often before us as in WW1 and WW2, and onto Korea, the Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 5, 2013 13:04:25 GMT -6
No wrong the US firearms industry did not call it an assualt rifle, so many people confuse what AR trully menas outside of the left, it is the designation for Armalite the company that started to make the 15 and 30. It wasn't never used by firearm manufacutres to be called assualt rifle. That came along later to degrade that type of firearm by anti gun people.
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Sept 5, 2013 14:23:41 GMT -6
Sure they did, I remember the ads and articles from that time.
And it's no different than their use of the term 'tactical' now, which they seem to want to brand everything with.
The antis just picked up the term and used it, they didn't invent it.
|
|
|
Post by musher on Sept 5, 2013 15:04:24 GMT -6
because of countrys like Canada, that fall under the US protection umbrella, is why we have stockpiles of waepons- and they sit back and let us take care of things no disrepect, just a fact of life I agree. Then we whine when you do something . As one of our prime ministers (Jean Christian) said, "The Americans are our best friend, whether we like it or not."
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 5, 2013 18:55:27 GMT -6
FWS do you have an ad or article from a US firearm maker showing such verbage? I would love to see that used by a gun maker assault rifle in ad.
Tatical is far different than assult for sure. tatical gear, firearms etc. Not in the same context as assault.
|
|
|
Post by FWS on Sept 5, 2013 19:10:45 GMT -6
Didn't bother to read the link above huh................ Just a quote from the article, This is how guns were marketed in 1981. That year, the Remington 870 was featured on the back cover of the July issue of Guns & Ammo, in an ad that emphasized quality and durability. “The 870,” the ad read. “Still as American as apple pie.”
The front cover of the same issue showed something very different: a photograph of two gleaming black rifles, with the cover line: “The New Breed of Assault Rifle.” And here's the magazine cover............ You'll say that until the antis pick up that term and use it............. Sure it is, tactical : of or relating to combat tactics: as a (1) : of or occurring at the battlefront <a tactical defense> <a tactical first strike> (2) : using or being weapons or forces employed at the battlefront
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 5, 2013 19:33:09 GMT -6
So a magazine calls it assault where is the gun maker stating such? US gun maker using the term our new assault rifle or this is the first of our assault rifle lineup or something to that effect? Not some shooting magazine making reference.
I could make a tatical move in chess or checkers too, sure don't mean the battle front now does it? LOL.
I cold buy a pair of tactical pants or shirt what can it do? LOL.
In the 80's they where called parachute pants LOL...............
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Sept 5, 2013 20:37:31 GMT -6
Assault weapon is a military term, these days also used by civilians for any scary looking gun, and there are many! WOLRD GUNS Modern Firearms Assault Rifles world.guns.ru/assault/assault-e.htmlUSA Armalite AR-10 Armalite AR-18 M4 M4A1 M14 M16 M16A1 M16A2 M16A3 M27 IAR Colt CAR-15 XM-177 Stoner 63 TRW LMR Bushmaster M17s Ruger AC-556 Mini-14GB XM29 OICW XM8 SIG-Sauer 516 SIG-Sauer 716 FN Mk.16 Mk.17 SCAR RobArm M96 XCR Z-M Weapons LR-300 ARMS VAULT www.armsvault.com/reference_gunglossary_assault-rifle.htmlAssault Rifle: A fully automatic rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. 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.
|
|