Comments by "Charles Eye" (@TheCharleseye) on "California Governor Gavin Newsom discusses guns and Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting | Raw" video.

"You used to be able to count on the courts." True. There are decades of court cases wherein judges knowingly backed unconstitutional laws. They're starting to see the result of that and now you can no longer just assume that judges are going to do the wrong thing. You just can't count on them any more, Gav.
8
@tonytheetiger3750 Well, the .223 is not a high caliber and at 55-70 grains, is not a heavy load. An AR15 has a pistol grip, so it's terrible for shooting from the hip and has to be held at chest or shoulder height for any effectiveness. Anyone who has ever fired a rifle or shotgun knows that a traditional stock is much easier to shoot from the hip. Pistol grips are for quickly aligning your sights while keeping your wrist at a more natural position. Anything made for killing with the least amount of focus and for war would have automatic and/or 3-round burst capability and an AR15 has neither of those things. I'm not sure what you're talking about with "gaming" as there are many semiautomatic rifles that are used for both competitive shooting and hunting (including the AR15). Neither of which is ever called "gaming," though. Are you talking about video games? That's the only thing I ever hear of being called gaming and I promise, nobody uses real rifles for such things. By your description, the weapons you're talking about are mostly WWII era weapons. Most modern sporting rifles don't align with your opinion of what an assault weapon is at all. Maybe stop listening to people who don't know anything about guns. Repeating their nonsense isn't helping anyone. I know for a fact there are Liberal/Democrat gun clubs out there who would help you gather factual information about these firearms. You would be surprised to know that most politicians and media figures have absolutely no idea what they're talking about on this subject.
4
111xelent Thanks. I just hate what the media and politicians have made people think about these firearms. I don't expect everyone to be knowledgeable about firearms but I do expect those who are tasked with writing laws and informing the public to at least have a basic understanding of them. When I see people reciting these common fallacies, I have to say something. AR15s chambered in .223 (5.56 NATO) aren't even legal to hunt larger game with in some States, because they can't reliably take them down in one shot. They're fine for feral pigs, coyotes, and other such animals but no humane hunter carries a .223 rifle for true large game. The 5.56 NATO round was chosen for its light weight (soldiers can carry more of them than the 7.62x51 that was used previously). It was well known that it wasn't nearly as effective as the 7.62 for killing but the military decided that it was worthwhile to increase available rounds. The logic was that it was sufficient to wound some of the enemy soldiers, because that would still take them out of the fight. Since war is about winning and not genocide, the decision to switch to the comparatively anemic 5.56 NATO was made. Most people don't know that, though. They think "That looks like a Rambo machine gun and Rambo kills hundreds of people all by himself in those movies! That's way too dangerous!" Meanwhile, their grandfather's 30-06 hunting rifle was punching fist-sized holes out of the far side of elk at 500 yards. It's amazing how far from the truth we've gotten.
2
111xelent I feel ya. Are you enjoying the new ammo background checks? I swear, Gruesome Newsom is the worst thing that ever happened to this State. On the plus side, I've revamped my reloading bench and have talked several other people into loading their own ammo. If nothing else, their ridiculous laws continue to make us more resourceful. If anything, I'll spend even more on ammo now, out of spite... and they still won't get a single dollar from me for their redundant background checks. I actually had someone try to tell me that it would stop felons from getting ammo. If background checks don't stop felons from getting guns, how are they going to stop them from getting ammo?! Ha! Just ridiculous.
2
Your gun laws keep me from buying a 5-round revolver that I was looking at, because it doesn't use imaginary technology (that obviously doesn't exist on any other gun, either). I guess I'll just have to go buy a semiauto handgun (that doesn't use the imaginary technology) and a few 10-round magazines because they're perfectly legal. Tell me again what these gun laws do to prevent crime, or protect...anyone?
2
What's an assault weapon? By definition, aren't all weapons assault weapons?
1
@claudineschultz8349 I've heard about the it, yes. I don't remember exactly where it was, either but I was not at all surprised by the results. After a lengthy research period, it turns out that criminals don't like to be shot! Lol
1
@claudineschultz8349 Agreed.
1