re: Journalists guide to the Firearms

quote:

---

ignorance on the topic by the media

---

I am pretty sure it isn't ignorance, as much as it is them willfully misinforming the public in order to promote an agenda.

FPSRussia?

That guy is awesome

to me its the same discussion. The facts need to be readily available and heavily discussed in a public fashion that everyone not only has access to, but would regularly access anyway. Anything less is the same as promoting the propaganda that is being pushed by the liberal media since almost ALL of your media outlets fall under this description.

This "Gun" got a kid suspended. Now we know there the principals get their talking points...

dammit im hungry as frick and you gonna post this shite? Now I want a pop tart

quote:

---

to me its the same discussion. The facts need to be readily available and heavily discussed in a public fashion that everyone not only has access to, but would regularly access anyway. Anything less is the same as promoting the propaganda that is being pushed by the liberal media since almost ALL of your media outlets fall under this description.

---

Yea I suppose you're right in that regard. I take "this" discussion more literally as "What is the difference...seems we are splitting hairs". In other words "why does the difference matter anyway?", rather than who is actually perpetuating or otherwise causing the confusion.SO to your point, I think this discussion needs to be put front and center, before we start pointing fingers on why we need to backtrack to said discussion.

I'm not denying that these facts need not be obstructed. In fact I am saying the opposite. If more people understood this simple distinction, we might actually be able to talk guns logically in this country. But, just like any other major political issue, the misinformed like to use the most severe, however improbable, instances of the law to try and prove their points.

quote:

---

It's kind of important to actually know what you're talking about to have an informed discussion on any topic.

---

unless you are a member of the media and then you can say what you want regardless of truth because there's a "right" for that.

ETA: I get what you are saying, im just fed up with the media. They are about as informed on guns as I am on frickin Hello Kitty

Wow. I learned a lot in this thread. Ive hunted all my life and knew that the guns they were talking about as fully automatic were not actually fully automatic. However, I did not know that those rifles in the pictures couldnt shoot any faster than a deer rifle.

I get the three settings of single shot, 3 round burst, and fully auto. If it has that ability, if im understanding this correctly, that makes it an assault rifle?

A couple of questions:

1. Do these mean looking rifles that are only single shot hold a lot more bullets than my plain old browning rifles?

2. If so, what are they primarily used for? I dont see a scope, so i dont see them as useful as a deer rifle to hunt deer, etc. If they are for home protection, wouldnt a shotgun be a better choice given the greater likelihood of close proximity?

Im not asking the questions because i "have an agenda." Nor am i some liberal that wants to take away these types of guns. If they are truly no different than deer rifles in shooting capability, i see no reason to ban them.

Im just curious as to what purpose they serve other than being fun. Nothing wrong with them only being for fun, but im trying to see why else to have one. I actually have one sitting at my parents house in a locked cabinet. I will have to figure out what to do with it once they dont want the guns anymore.

Thanks!

Firing an AR15 is horrifying...