SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 14, 2017 11:45am
Haha if actually done, thanks!justincredible;1858973 wrote:Ok.
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Jun 14, 2017 11:45am
GoodQuakerOats;1858975 wrote:He is dead.
salto
Posts: 2,611
Jun 14, 2017 11:46am
Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.queencitybuckeye;1858940 wrote:Just heard the first, highly unlikely reference to "automatic weapon". Only a matter of time before the equally (and intentionally) wrong term "assault rifle" is used.
Hard to take claims of wanting a discussion seriously when they can't wait to tell the same baldfaced lies.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jun 14, 2017 11:51am
The M4 is an automatic weapon (equipped for 3 round burst or full auto).salto;1858979 wrote:Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.
Are there reports that an M4 was the weapon used?
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Jun 14, 2017 11:52am
I'll be surprised if it was an M4. Those are highly illegal for civilian use. The M4 is an automatic weapon, either fully or burst.salto;1858979 wrote:Personally, I've not heard the term "automatic weapon" used yet. Do you not believe the M4 is indeed an assault rifle? Seems like most of the internet considers it one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
salto
Posts: 2,611
Jun 14, 2017 11:52am
Yes. Although, I thought the M4 did not have full auto. It has semi and 3 round burst.queencitybuckeye;1858983 wrote:The M4 is an automatic weapon (equipped for 3 round burst or full auto).
Are there reports that an M4 was the weapon used?
That said, even if a civilian version with only semi - is it still an assault weapon?
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jun 14, 2017 11:55am
Link? The ones I've seen are saying AR-15 which is indisputably NOT an "assault weapon".salto;1858985 wrote:I agree and yes. Although, can a semi-auto version of the M4 still be considered an assault weapon?
salto
Posts: 2,611
Jun 14, 2017 11:58am
Not arguing here, just what I've heard on CBS.queencitybuckeye;1858986 wrote:Link? .
As for links (no idea if correct or not) Search Google - "shooter republican softball practice m4" and you'll find a few.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jun 14, 2017 12:04pm
The variant with full-auto capability is known as an M4A1.salto;1858985 wrote:Yes. Although, I thought the M4 did not have full auto. It has semi and 3 round burst.
Not by any definition I've ever heard except for politicians with an agenda.That said, even if a civilian version with only semi - is it still an assault weapon?
salto
Posts: 2,611
Jun 14, 2017 12:14pm
Other than it looks cool, why do you believe so many civilians want a military styled rifle? Even the semi auto version is designed to mimic the M4, which is for close-quartered "combat" situations.queencitybuckeye;1858990 wrote:
Not by any definition I've ever heard except for politicians with an agenda.
fish82
Posts: 4,111
Jun 14, 2017 12:25pm
You already said it...because it "looks cool."salto;1858993 wrote:Other than it looks cool, why do you believe so many civilians want a military styled rifle? Even the semi auto version is designed to mimic the M4, which is for close-quartered "combat" situations.
These are essentially the exact same gun.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
Jun 14, 2017 12:28pm
Regardless of their looks, they are fun to shoot and easy to customize.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Jun 14, 2017 12:35pm
+1, troll trash sleeper just can't help himself.SportsAndLady;1858969 wrote:Thread ban for sleeper please. I'm interested in information on this shooting, not sleeper's troll attempts to get the conservatives of this site riled up.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Jun 14, 2017 12:37pm
Apparently he campaigned for Bernie too [emoji848].iclfan2;1858974 wrote:His facebook page identifies him as a Bernie supporting Trump hater.
mcburg93
Posts: 3,167
Jun 14, 2017 1:08pm
I am still dumbfounded how a guy planning on killing people, shoots fifty to sixty times(some of the reports have said this number) and only hit a few people and killing none. I would think you would practice with your gun first to know how to aim it and be somewhat accurate. Cant really have a killing spree if you do not kill people. On a serious note, I am glad there were only a few injuries and the gunman is now going to be plant food.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 14, 2017 1:14pm
He probably wasn't expecting shots to be fired back at him by police. I imagine most of the shots fired were towards them, and not just people standing there.mcburg93;1859013 wrote:I am still dumbfounded how a guy planning on killing people, shoots fifty to sixty times(some of the reports have said this number) and only hit a few people and killing none. I would think you would practice with your gun first to know how to aim it and be somewhat accurate. Cant really have a killing spree if you do not kill people. On a serious note, I am glad there were only a few injuries and the gunman is now going to be plant food.
But that's a complete guess.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Jun 14, 2017 1:30pm
R
rocketalum
Posts: 268
Jun 14, 2017 1:38pm
Can we get a ban for QO. Without Sleepers troll act or QO's links maybe the adults can have a conversation. Any chance this thread stays out of the politics forum?
CenterBHSFan
Posts: 6,115
Jun 14, 2017 1:42pm
Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
R
rocketalum
Posts: 268
Jun 14, 2017 1:47pm
Agree but if the point of this thread is discuss the developing situation and not have it turn into just flaming the right or left as monsters then we need to either move it the politics thread and let it devolve down that path or, remove those that can't help themselves so the rest of us can talk about it as a event not a political weapon.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jun 14, 2017 1:50pm
If by "posting style", you mean someone who disagrees with my views, I couldn't agree more. If by "posting style", you mean transparent trolling, I completely disagree.CenterBHSFan;1859026 wrote:Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jun 14, 2017 1:57pm
Sleeper was trolling and it was blatantly obvious.CenterBHSFan;1859026 wrote:Not a fan of just banning people we don't like them or don't like their posting style.
Fab4Runner
Posts: 6,196
Jun 14, 2017 1:58pm
Eye roll. Right wing Twitter is just as bad.QuakerOats;1859017 wrote:https://news.grabien.com/story-left-wing-twitter-celebrates-shooting-rep-scalise
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gabby-giffords-shooting-response-twitter_us_59414537e4b09ad4fbe4a66f?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Jun 14, 2017 1:58pm
This, plus QO hasn't really done anything to justify a ban from this thread.queencitybuckeye;1859032 wrote:If by "posting style", you mean someone who disagrees with my views, I couldn't agree more. If by "posting style", you mean transparent trolling, I completely disagree.
CenterBHSFan
Posts: 6,115
Jun 14, 2017 1:59pm
I don't think Sleeper's views have changed at all. I think he's just shitstirring for laughs.
But, what if I'm wrong? What if he does think what he posts? What if the general consensus about him is wrong?
At the end of the day, we choose if we engage him or ignore him. Sometimes we ignore him, sometimes we play along. It's up to us, really. I don't think banning is the answer.
But, what if I'm wrong? What if he does think what he posts? What if the general consensus about him is wrong?
At the end of the day, we choose if we engage him or ignore him. Sometimes we ignore him, sometimes we play along. It's up to us, really. I don't think banning is the answer.