Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Boulder shooter:t used a handgun ruth doesn’t matter

The ds are running off a narrative. Where truth has no place
Police report he only used a hand gun.
https://www.westernjournal.com/demo...ing&utm_content=conservative-tribune

An AR with a brace is technically a handgun.

And the point of this thread is?
It was an AR pistol.
Same caliber, magazines, rate of fire.
This is not a technicality that is a good talking point.

Exactly.

They are only running mass shootings that fit their narrative. If it’s not a white shooter suppress it. If it’s not “assault rifle” suppress it. It’s a dog and pony show

You’re exactly right but it wasn’t a SBR. It was a pistol.

I guess the media will now come up with a AP designation for assault pistol.

Obviously, neither of you know what a Pistol Brace is and why the use of a braced pistol actually fits one of the Second Amendment attack plans upon the Second Amendment.

This is an AR pistol with a stabilizing brace:




So is this:



Notice in that second picture, the pistol's being stabilized against the shoulder.

Since neither of you apparently keep up on any gun laws regulations enacted since 1968, let me give you a visual primer:



Now use your brain a little bit and see if you can figure out how the Marxist will use the to further attack the Second Amendment through regulatory action.

It has a registered “pistol” lower.

Thanks for the demo but most here have seen them and quite a few own them.

This is the same sort of intellectual dishonest that the gun-grabbers engage in when they claim any black rifle is an “assault weapon”.

The point is the same as it has always been - focus on the perp, not the tool.

There’s very little intellectual about dishonesty but I get your point. The masses don’t know the difference or even care.

There is no "registration" in Colorado.

The gun was classified as a "pistol" on the 4473, but it was not "registered" as such.

That's a faux SBR, i.e., Short Barrelled Rifle. In other words, it's a work-around for the law that prohibits SBRs, which shouldn't be a law to start with, legislated by idiots who believed that an SBR is somehow too dangerous because it's concealable. Makes no sense, because you can carry a handgun, which is many times more concealable, and can kill one just as dead.

The reason it's in the law to start with is that the original NFA also prohibited all handguns. There was such a public outcry, however, over this that legislators were forced to expunge the part about handguns, but since few owned SBRs and Short Barrelled Shotguns, they just forgot to also remove them from the law, which were included to start with for the same reason handguns were originally included, i.e., because they were concealable firearms.

It's really crazy that SBRs and SBSs are prohibited, and only happened because the original purpose of that portion of the National Firearms Act was to outlaw all concealable firearms, but they were forced to remove handguns due to their popularity among the public. SBRs and SBSs, of course, should have also been removed, because they are less concealable than handguns, which were ultimately not prohibited.

Anything "black" fits their weak-ass narrative.

You know. Black loafers, black dresses, black sneakers.

There’s a definite commonality within that.

It’s good to know that a Form 4473 bears no direct resemblance to a registration,,as such.

Who the fugck is ruth?

If the Dems pass their new "Universal Background Check" legislation, then you will have true registrations with a central repository containing all firearm sales including make, model, and serial number kept indefinitely.

Ruth’s dead! LOL. May she rot in hell!

Rifle, handgun, shotgun, whatever.......... A nutcase shot people. That means blame the gun regardless of what gun was used. Gotta stick to the narrative and the agenda.

Tell your buddy Hastings that.. in those words.

MAYBE YOU CAN CONVINCE HIM TO STOP VOTING FOR COMMUCRATS!