montana Wrote:We already debated this add nausea.:confused: What is there to debate? It's a fact that gun people were perfectly okay with the "assault weapons" term until the anti-gun crowd started using it, too.
Then it went from "Assault weapons are cool!" to "There's no such thing as assault weapons!"
montana Wrote:You obviously have not personally compared the two. Like bump stocks, they are unreliable toys.1. I don't need to have used binary triggers, myself. There are dozens of videos showing them in use.
2. How well they replicate full-auto fire clearly depends on the skill of the shooter, but it's equally clear that in the right hands, they can replicate full-auto fire extremely well and have the potential to be much more than "unreliable toys." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFA2-2mdnRM
3. Even when used as ostensibly designed, binary triggers effectively give a semi-auto-only rifle a two-round burst capability.
montana Wrote:The AR-15 is not select fire which is a requirement for an assault rifle.A technical distinction without a practical difference.
montana Wrote:Opinions are like certain body parts, we all have one.Actually, that's not true.
montana Wrote:You forgot the other things that come with repressive governments.Nah, I didn't forget. The issue isn't whether or not some governments are repressive. It's what effect would a gun ban have on mass shootings.
You presented evidence that supports the anti-gun claim that a ban would prevent mass shootings.