Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite'

@Sevenizz: We have a winner!

No I am making a huge point. If you want to ban what you are referring as a assault weapon you need to declare what exactly that is. I posted two rifles that are exactly the same just different platforms. They both perform exactly the same, they just look different so do you consider both of them assault weapons based on your definition. You need to need to declare this. You are the one saying we need to ban assault weapons so what exactly makes it an assault weapon. You are the google warrior so please quit deflecting it is a simple question.

You just don't know how to answer the question because you have no idea what you are talking about. Simple as that.

@WitIsWisdom: @Xabiss: I've noticed that the majority of people I see that advocate for gun control know little to nothing about guns. AR15, 'fully semi automatic' and 'military style' are buzzwords blown up by the media to scare the ignorant masses into going along with their gun ban narratives. The overwhelming majority of shootings are done with handguns. Likely because handguns are far more easier to conceal and you can hold one in each hand thus allowing you to fire more and aim in different directions at the same time. The mainstream media never reports on mass shootings done with handguns because it goes against their scary AR15 narrative.

I see people on social media all the time talk about how 'they don't wanna ban all guns, they just wanna get rid of all semi automatic weapons' most of them change their mind real quick in embarrassment when you tell them that nearly every gun available for legal purchase is semi automatic including pistols and shotguns which do not fit the scary assault rifle narrative the media pushes. Some of them confuse semi-automatic for automatic due to the media's "fully semi-automatic" myth. Some will try to argue that lever and bolt action is all anyone needs until you show them that is possible to rapid fire with them and its only a matter of time till a mass shooting with lever/bolt action rifles gets blown up by the media and that is taken away too.

The people that also try to argue you don't need "military guns" for hunting either underestimate how durable animals are. They aren't as fragile as us humans especially deer, elk and bears. In fact if you try to shoot a bear with anything other than a heavy caliber bullet all you're doing is pissing it off and might as well shoot yourself to avoid its wrath. The woman in this video has no clue how tough some of these animals are and thinks it overkill when it is actually humane. Not to mention she thinks incendiary ammo is "heat seeking. Some states won't let you use weaker and smaller calibers for deer and elk hunting because they won't efficiently kill the animal quickly.

Steven Crowder did a video similar to your picture comparison Xabiss that shows most people are ignorant about guns and just assume one is more deadly based on appearance and buzzwords. So majority rules means nothing like Joebones tried to argue.

Here we have an Army general that appears to never have been trained on how to even hold a gun properly on a mainstream news network trying to "educate" the masses on how the AR15 works.

AR15 bullet..... are you kidding me?!

I don't even own guns and I can spot this bullshit. You'd think with all the first and third person shooter video games on the market people would at least understand some basic things about guns.

Understand this is your average democrat when it comes to firearms:

You have no idea what you are talking about and are a completely gullible person that still argues with facts after stating false information multiple times and being schooled up on the issue from multiple different people.

An AR15 is not an assault rifle... No matter how bad you, a few ignorant members of congress (that know absolutely nothing about guns), or that cherry-picked definition you found online (which was already disputed and wrong from the start) want them to be.

There is no one getting butthurt over you having a typical liberal meltdown while knowing nothing about what you are even upset about. I am actually quite amazed at how ignorant people can truly be, and you are the perfect model of just that... At least you people are consistent. Consistently wrong, but consistent none the less.

Anyways, at this point in time I'm just going to assume you are trolling, because nobody can be that unintelligent. I was hoping I could educate you, but it's clear that you are either a brainwashed liberal snowflake that is so beyond lost that you would believe anything your overlords tell you and believe everything you see and hear online, or get off by trying to get a rise out of people for no other reason than to be annoying.

Perhaps one day you will stop hiding from shadows and grow up, but then again it's people just like you that they depend on, and they know won't let them down. Keep dancing puppet.

#walkaway

@WitIsWisdom:

What do you think the reason is for people thinking that it is?

Yes, assault rifles pre-1986 (and in most other cases as well, and in several states) are already banned. "Assault weapons" is something that recent agenda-pushing has made buzz words... however, Assault weapons do not exist in any formality. The people pushing the agenda are trying to say that pretty much every semi-automatic gun including pistols, shot guns, and even revolvers are "Assault weapons".. lol. Which is not only funny but completely ridiculous, especially when you take into account that Assault rifles have a selevtive fire rate, and are not strictly semi-automatic... Civilian rifles, carbines, pistols, and shotguns are semi-auto (one shot per trigger pull). To answer your question however.

Yes and yes in that order.

Simple. It's democratic agenda pushing and reliance on ignorance. News and articles online are cherry-picked (they leave out the stories about pistols, knives, blunt objects, drugs, diseases, alcohol, and several other things that are a much larger concern ((for the most part)) and those that saved lives because they were armed and were able to fight back) and these people push their agendas to help further their careers and fatten their wallets while trying to gain the trust of people, while effectively spreading fear and doubt (their biggest ally) all while trying to look like the "good guys" while in actuality are pushing for fewer rights and a tighter grip on government policies and power, which once again only benefits them.

These people actually believe that they care about them and eat right out their hands. Our forefathers warned us about this, and thankfully we do have an out clause if push comes to shove... so it's all good either way. Just sad that so many buy into the lies presented without asking questions or thinking about motives. Like I already alluded to before the number of people killed or shot by civilian rifles are very low in comparison to the mortality rate of many other weapons, makeshift weapons, cigarettes, alcohol, drugs, workplace accidents etc.

This is a "hey it's you not us" thing that they can remove without having to spend a dime on rehabilitation programs, training, etc. It's a "blame it on the people" tactic to keep people in fear and arguing rather than focusing on the bigger problems, and if they can throw out buzz words to confuse people that are uneducated on the realities at hand then all the better for them if those people never question it... right?

If you want to know more and are truly interested then shoot me a pm.

You're so hung up on semantics.

When someone hears assault weapons ban, they want an AR-15 banned. It doesn't matter if they are correct on the exact terminology. That's one of the weapons they want gone.

The poll is accurate.

@WitIsWisdom:

People genuinely believe this is an assault rifle. You think political agenda is is the only reason?

I dont think so. Now im no gun expert but can any other rifle be modded so easily into what essentially *is* an automatic weapon? Feel free to correct me if im wrong.

Funny part is I can't think of one mass shooting that was done with a modified AR15 that was made fully automatic without some cheesy method like a bump stock. Even that bump stock was only used in the Vegas mass shooting and then was taken off the market already. You can do the same thing using a belt, but the thing about full auto is it really effects your accuracy to a crazy degree.

@Xabiss:

Im more posing the question as to why this is being debated, ar15: assault weapon or not. It factually is not, so why are people hellbent on singling out this weapon in particular?

Funny you want to just ban AR-15s so AK47s, AR10s, AR30s, bullpups, and AR50s are all okay? Yes it is important to get your information straight because we need to know exactly what you are wanting to ban. Just FYI all the guns I just listed are much more powerful then AR15s. So no the poll was no accurate and it was not explained well. If you ask most people if they want assault weapons ban I would have to ask for the definition before answering it. So the poll is complete shit and I have proven it, because I would say assault weapons the military uses should not be in the public hands without a stamp which is the way it is now. So I would answer yes to the question.

"It doesn't matter if they are correct on the exact terminology."

And WTF was this line. Really? So you can poll people without using proper terminology and it shouldn't matter ROFLMAO! Seriously you can't make this up. Seriously you need to take some grad work and learn more about research. It is getting pretty obvious you know nothing about proper research except being a Google warrior.

400 million guns in America today over 100 million people own those guns. Guess what less then .01% of guns actually kill people which means statistically guns are not that damn dangerous. Alcohol and smoking kill more people each year then guns do. Why don't you want that banned? Where is your outrage?

So what now Google Warrior?

I don't need to change the fact that you are an idiot when it comes to guns. You have already proven that fact with what you posted on this forum and I thank you for that. You can't even answer a simple question why the top gun should be banned and the bottom one is okay when they are the exact same gun. This just proves gun idiots are the ones that want to ban something they don't even understand.

AR15s kill less people then smoking, ladders, alcohol, fist, knives, bludgeoning weapons, just to name a few senseless acts, but your agenda is on something that in the grand scheme of things is pretty damn safe.

Thats what I can't figure out because there are a ton of other guns that are actually more dangerous. There are a ton of semiautomatic pistols that are more dangerous then an AR15. Its because you have people that don't understand guns trying to make decisions they know nothing about.

Well the difference is violent person on person crime.

This argument between the two of you is tedious. Nonetheless this post was ridiculous. Guns are a WEAPON. Period.

Fists can be a weapon. John Wick's pencil was a weapon. Baseball bats... the list is actually endless. What's your point?

Fist are a weapon, knives are a weapon, a car is a weapon, hammer is a weapon. Anything you use to cause damage is a dang weapon. Guns have a purpose other then kill people. They can be used for sport, hunting, killing vermin, and self defense. So no it has a point and it shows in the grand scheme of things with the amount of guns we do have cause very little harm.

Flawed examples. Guns are created for only one reason. Sure you can use them for recreation but ultimately they were developed to take lives. Your examples are the opposite. What's your point?

Wrong. The old conservative gun hugger comments. None of those items you listed were created for taking a life. Guns were. Fail.

A majority of Americans want the assault weapons ban re-instated, which included AR15.

There you go.

This isn't as complex as you're trying to make it.

Knives are weapons I'm pretty sure our early ancestors used knives to take the lives of animals and enemy tribes and not just to cut materials and already dead food. I've noticed most people that brag about having less shootings in European countries fail to acknowledge that they're starting to make up for it with their growing amount of knife crimes. Even if it's original intention was not to harm others it doesn't change the fact that they are being used to hurt others especially more than the weapon designed to kill. Places like Britain and Sweden show that despite the ban on guns people will just find other ways to hurt each other hence the knife epidemic in London. Sweden has a growing amount of a grenade attacks too.

@heirren: No, I don't think that is the only reason, but it is the largest reason. The vast majority of the people that want these guns banned have no idea what they are let alone ever fired one or a similar counterpart. There is a big difference in a semi automatic firearm and a fully automatic one and bump stocks have been banned now as well, so there isnt a way around it anymore. The funny thing is, people are acting as though an AR15 is an assault rifle, which it most certainly is not. Wanting them banned when there are literally hundreds of other similar guns with different names. Calling everything from pistols, revolvers, carbines, rifles, and shotguns "assault weapons" is an agenda and absolutely ridiculous. One of the recent shootings was done with what is legally a pistol. I just think it's funny people don't even know what they are asking for, because they don't even know what they are talking about. AR15s are not going to get banned. The next thing they will be coming for are large capacity drum mags and things of that sort. Coming after guns with standard 20-30 round mags though? Well, all I'm saying is that's a fight that probably wont be won, and I know plenty of people who wont just be giving them up.

@WitIsWisdom:

There is and there isnt. What people should be looking to ban or restrict is the amount of rounds per magazine. They want muskets, or should be making the argument for muskets need to be reloaded, which would greatly hinder a shooters ability to commit a mass shooting.

So i understand the want to eliminate such rifles which allow the shooter to point and shoot in such succession. What purpose do they serve?

@zaryia: No they don't delusional boy.

Okay fine so the two guns I posted should be banned? Or is the top one bad and the bottom one okay? Because they are both the same weapon just different looking. So what makes a weapon an assault rifle then? Both those guns use the same round, same rate of fire, and both use a magazine. Both guns can do the same amount of damage. So what makes one more dangerous then the other? Is it the big bad scary handle? Is it the scary rails? Is the the stock because it is adjustable. What makes it more dangerous?

Don't be such a salty incel and at least try to prove the poll wrong, instead of just spamming the same copy and paste troll trash in every thread when data or facts hurt your feelings.

What an absolute shit-poster.

Most Republicans would support legislation banning assault-style weapons, a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll found Wednesday — a finding that contradicts President Donald Trump's claim earlier the same day that there's "no political appetite" for such restrictions.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/07/poll-most-voters-support-assault-weapons-ban-1452586

Most would currently say both, according to this poll.

They want a ban on assault-style weapons. This isn't very difficult to understand.

Hyperbole aside but individuals do not need those weapons. Handguns for home protection and rifles for hunting are fine and no one is suggesting they need be removed. However, weapons that are designed for more carnage should not be legal.

Hey look we agree on something lol.

I reckon handguns cayse more day to day violence than any rifle, though, be it a shooting or just used as a threat.

What about gang/drug warfare? To some this is alien but if you live in a big urban city, i can see why--given someones location within a city--would want a real threat like an ar15. So i see the catch that people can make.

A lefty telling some about emotional arguments when your entire agenda focuses on emotion? Hey kid, these firearms aren't going anywhere.

@LJS9502_basic: All these examples require human input.

See it's always hyperbole with guns. Other countries don't have these issues and they don't have liberal gun laws. Connecting the dots one can see that the more guns the more gun deaths. And this is becoming epidemic in the US. Something needs changed.

@LJS9502_basic:

That i disagree with, because the cultures are different. Theres other issues within the States that breed this violence. The technology behind the violence will never be the real issue.

At this point there are such a large number of them on the market in so many different forms that they would take many years to ban one at a time and it would be pointless regardless of the argument. The US has a lot of enemies and it was said by the Japanese some years in the past that the military isn't what scared them, it was the armed civilians. We might not have the biggest military on the planet, but we are the most heavily armed country as a whole, and it keeps us safe from invasion for the most part (at least for now). The majority of the firearms that people bought for the wrong reasons wouldn't be turned in anyways because they are highly unlikely to be registered. The criminal that seemingly has nothing to lose or fear would love if the honest people had to turn their guns over. Look at gun violence in states that allow open carry and stand your ground laws. The numbers there are much lower than in other areas in the country that don't even allow concealed carry. It puts the question of doubt in the shooter's mind and can oftentimes be enough to make them rethink the immediate consequences.

Violence with pistols or other forms of weaponry whether it be intended for killing or improvised is a much larger problem, but the agenda isn't pushed. The numbers aren't even close.

It's always easy to blame one thing, but they could have just as easily been using just about any gun, or a pistol in each hand, or running people over in vehicles, or using homemade explosives or gas.... I mean if someone goes off the deep end and decides to go on a killing spree and no one knows they are going to do it, it would be very hard to stop regardless of the circumstances or what they ultimately decide to use...

I'm not entirely opposed to banning 100 rd. drum mags, which is why I brought it up earlier. Is there ever a time you would need that? Probably not... a zombie apocalypse perhaps? Joking aside, people bought those and they are still legal at this point in time.

My only argument towards not banning the drum mags is that some people like myself know how to do very fast tactical reloads, and could shoot 3 to 4 mags at nearly the same rate. However, for the average or untrained person their reload speeds would be much slower.

I don't feel as though this is an availability issue as much as an in the wrong hands issue. I had to have a firearms safety class and take a test to even be able to go hunting. Instead of more bans and restrictions I feel that it makes more sense to have stricter guidelines and testing procedures. In some states like TX, OK, MT, etc. you can go buy a firearm out of someone's trunk in a parking lot. I feel there should be more rigorous training and testing, and it should be done every couple of years.

Not that it will make a difference either way, but if it helps people sleep at night.

@WitIsWisdom: Our military wasn't as expansive back then and we had a policy of non intervention. Time has changed. The military is enough of a deterrent. And seriously the US population would be incapable of mounting a sustained and coordinated defense. You watched Red Dawn too much.

That's too bad, looks like a lot of more people will die.

Considering the number of people who die by "assault weapons" is extremely low, I wouldn't and shouldn't expect a genuine dialogue from you on the matter.

A lot of people died last week. That's genuine.

They should ban assault style weapons, IMO. Most Americans agree as well.

Perspective is important.

10-12k people die annually due to impaired drivers (alcohol and/or drugs). That's almost 30x more than individuals gunned down by rifles. Tens of billions (some estimates up to 140 billion) annually due to impaired driving. And take out alcohol/drugs, and include just unsafe driving, you're in the 20-30k deaths annual range (annual cost getting near 1 trillion). The most dangerous weapon routinely in American hands isn't a "scary looking" semi-automatic rifle, it's a vehicle.

Funny people die from drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, and vaping and I don't see near the outrage. More so then AR15s by a long shot.

Then explain what it is then. What makes a weapon an Assault weapon then. BTW the bottom picture would not have been banned in 1994. Again you all are arguing shit you don't even understand. Explain to me what makes a weapon an assault weapon.

Again you don't even know what you are talking about. In 1994 the bottom gun would not have been banned. So to you what makes a weapon an assault weapon. If you can't answer that simple question then you just need to stop because you have no damn clue what you are even talking about. You just except anything the liberals say is the only answer you got.