Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Most every freedom guaranteed by the Constitution also has limitations. I agree but where do we draw the line on the 2nd Amendment is difficult and subject to a lot of interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Most every freedom guaranteed by the Constitution also has limitations. I agree but where do we draw the line on the 2nd Amendment is difficult and subject to a lot of interpretation. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 There is no need for Americans to own military assault weapons. Period. I have said this a thousand times. Ask Strych. I've qualified expert on the M2, 240, AT4, M16, and the Mark 19, and sharpshooter on the m4 so it's not like I'm scared of these weapons. I just don't understand why Anericans need assault rifles when shotguns and handguns would be more ideal in home defense. So YOU want to decide how others can defend their home / business ? Seems that way doesn't it. he has a habit of telling others what they should do or believe. Anyone who uses a rifle for home defense is an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 There is no need for Americans to own military assault weapons. Period. I have said this a thousand times. Ask Strych. I've qualified expert on the M2, 240, AT4, M16, and the Mark 19, and sharpshooter on the m4 so it's not like I'm scared of these weapons. I just don't understand why Anericans need assault rifles when shotguns and handguns would be more ideal in home defense. So YOU want to decide how others can defend their home / business ? Seems that way doesn't it. he has a habit of telling others what they should do or believe. Anyone who uses a rifle for home defense is an idiot. Indeed. Biden was right, a shotgun is the best for close quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,367 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 There is no need for Americans to own military assault weapons. Period. I have said this a thousand times. Ask Strych. I've qualified expert on the M2, 240, AT4, M16, and the Mark 19, and sharpshooter on the m4 so it's not like I'm scared of these weapons. I just don't understand why Anericans need assault rifles when shotguns and handguns would be more ideal in home defense. So YOU want to decide how others can defend their home / business ? Seems that way doesn't it. he has a habit of telling others what they should do or believe. Anyone who uses a rifle for home defense is an idiot. Indeed. Biden was right, a shotgun is the best for close quarters. Well, it's not only more effective but my primary point is that it's far less likely to shoot someone you didn't intend to, including your own family in an adjacent room or nearby neighbors, for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 These discussions are a HOOT. Now, the gun control fanatics on here say their motive is to stop murders...yet, they want to ban the weapon used the least in killings. Per the FBI crime stats...there are less than 400 annual murders committed with any form of long weapon...out of the ~8k murders committed annually. Let's see; non-Common Core math means that 400/8000 = .05. The most common long gun used in murders is...you guessed it... a shotgun...ouch... The exact numbers of murders committed with an AR15 are not tracked...AR15's are lumped in with all other rifles....so less than ~220 total murders are committed with any kind of "rifle; hunting, the mythical assault weapon, etc.". For giggles, let's just say all of them are committed with the dreaded Bushmaster or other evil AR brand...even though we know they are not...so that would mean that the dreaded evil AR would be responsible for 0.0275 of the murders committed annually in the US. But we know the # is really less than this... So, gun control guys, what is your real motive? Because it has nothing to do with stopping murders...handguns and even shotguns are used in more murders than the AR... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NC1406 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 These discussions are a HOOT. Now, the gun control fanatics on here say their motive is to stop murders...yet, they want to ban the weapon used the least in killings. Per the FBI crime stats...there are less than 400 annual murders committed with any form of long weapon...out of the ~8k murders committed annually. Let's see; non-Common Core math means that 400/8000 = .05. The most common long gun used in murders is...you guessed it... a shotgun...ouch... The exact numbers of murders committed with an AR15 are not tracked...AR15's are lumped in with all other rifles....so less than ~220 total murders are committed with any kind of "rifle; hunting, the mythical assault weapon, etc.". For giggles, let's just say all of them are committed with the dreaded Bushmaster or other evil AR brand...even though we know they are not...so that would mean that the dreaded evil AR would be responsible for 0.0275 of the murders committed annually in the US. But we know the # is really less than this... So, gun control guys, what is your real motive? Because it has nothing to do with stopping murders...handguns and even shotguns are used in more murders than the AR... Nice post. I started to write a post along these lines but did not like how it was worded. You did a great job of communicating my thoughts. What is the purpose of gun control? If to prevent murders then the semi automatic rifle should not be the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japantiger 4,051 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 These discussions are a HOOT. Now, the gun control fanatics on here say their motive is to stop murders...yet, they want to ban the weapon used the least in killings. Per the FBI crime stats...there are less than 400 annual murders committed with any form of long weapon...out of the ~8k murders committed annually. Let's see; non-Common Core math means that 400/8000 = .05. The most common long gun used in murders is...you guessed it... a shotgun...ouch... The exact numbers of murders committed with an AR15 are not tracked...AR15's are lumped in with all other rifles....so less than ~220 total murders are committed with any kind of "rifle; hunting, the mythical assault weapon, etc.". For giggles, let's just say all of them are committed with the dreaded Bushmaster or other evil AR brand...even though we know they are not...so that would mean that the dreaded evil AR would be responsible for 0.0275 of the murders committed annually in the US. But we know the # is really less than this... So, gun control guys, what is your real motive? Because it has nothing to do with stopping murders...handguns and even shotguns are used in more murders than the AR... Nice post. I started to write a post along these lines but did not like how it was worded. You did a great job of communicating my thoughts. What is the purpose of gun control? If to prevent murders then the semi automatic rifle should not be the target. It's about control .... and nothing else...and Loretta Lynch wants to control your thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeBags7277 734 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 These discussions are a HOOT. Now, the gun control fanatics on here say their motive is to stop murders...yet, they want to ban the weapon used the least in killings. Per the FBI crime stats...there are less than 400 annual murders committed with any form of long weapon...out of the ~8k murders committed annually. Let's see; non-Common Core math means that 400/8000 = .05. The most common long gun used in murders is...you guessed it... a shotgun...ouch... The exact numbers of murders committed with an AR15 are not tracked...AR15's are lumped in with all other rifles....so less than ~220 total murders are committed with any kind of "rifle; hunting, the mythical assault weapon, etc.". For giggles, let's just say all of them are committed with the dreaded Bushmaster or other evil AR brand...even though we know they are not...so that would mean that the dreaded evil AR would be responsible for 0.0275 of the murders committed annually in the US. But we know the # is really less than this... So, gun control guys, what is your real motive? Because it has nothing to do with stopping murders...handguns and even shotguns are used in more murders than the AR... I don't believe at all that banning so-called assault weapons will eliminate murder and have never argued that. But it might reduce the occurrences of the sort of MASS murders that are becoming an epidemic in our country..Hunting rifles evolved for one purpose: hunting. They might have some use in a secondary role in home defense or fighting a guerrilla war of resistance. Shotguns are primarily hunting tools, although they also can serve in those secondary roles. Pistols evolved as tools against street crime or to resolve personal disputes, although they can be used in those secondary roles and some folks find them fun on the shooting range. The assault rifle was developed at the end of WWII for one purpose: To deliver maximum firepower into multiple human beings in order to kill as rapidly and efficiently as possible. A valuable tool for the military, but a goal we shouldn't support in civilian life. As for defense against despotism: Taking up arms in defense of our freedom is a basic right and a laudable goal. At the time the 2nd Amendment was ratified, an armed citizen could reasonably expect to have comparable firepower to the military, perhaps even superior firepower if you consider the Kentucky long rifle superior to the smooth bore military musket. (I know the long rifle of the day was often smaller caliber, but it had longer range and greater accuracy.) Even then, of course, the average citizen couldn't afford and generally didn't desire artillery. Did our Founding Fathers imagine heavy machine guns, planes, tanks, smart bombs, and drones when they wrote about civilian militias wielding personal arms to secure the freedom of the state? Should the average civilian have access to Apache helicopters, modern mortars, cruise missiles, Abrams tanks, and Predator drones? Military parity 'just in case'? The question we face is whether the assumed value of a personal assault rifle in resisting the hypothetical threat of a professional military force outweighs the damage being done to our society by putting a weapon capable of such large scale slaughter into the hands of almost anyone on the street that wants one. Does their civilian availability serve more to protect our security or to threaten our security? I'm not saying banning assault weapons is a foregone conclusion or guaranteed solution, I'm just saying allowing them isn't automatically justified either. It's a conversation we need to have as a nation, not one to dismiss at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven_tiger 5 Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share Posted December 7, 2015 These discussions are a HOOT. Now, the gun control fanatics on here say their motive is to stop murders...yet, they want to ban the weapon used the least in killings. Per the FBI crime stats...there are less than 400 annual murders committed with any form of long weapon...out of the ~8k murders committed annually. Let's see; non-Common Core math means that 400/8000 = .05. The most common long gun used in murders is...you guessed it... a shotgun...ouch... The exact numbers of murders committed with an AR15 are not tracked...AR15's are lumped in with all other rifles....so less than ~220 total murders are committed with any kind of "rifle; hunting, the mythical assault weapon, etc.". For giggles, let's just say all of them are committed with the dreaded Bushmaster or other evil AR brand...even though we know they are not...so that would mean that the dreaded evil AR would be responsible for 0.0275 of the murders committed annually in the US. But we know the # is really less than this... So, gun control guys, what is your real motive? Because it has nothing to do with stopping murders...handguns and even shotguns are used in more murders than the AR... I don't believe at all that banning so-called assault weapons will eliminate murder and have never argued that. But it might reduce the occurrences of the sort of MASS murders that are becoming an epidemic in our country..Hunting rifles evolved for one purpose: hunting. They might have some use in a secondary role in home defense or fighting a guerrilla war of resistance. Shotguns are primarily hunting tools, although they also can serve in those secondary roles. Pistols evolved as tools against street crime or to resolve personal disputes, although they can be used in those secondary roles and some folks find them fun on the shooting range. The assault rifle was developed at the end of WWII for one purpose: To deliver maximum firepower into multiple human beings in order to kill as rapidly and efficiently as possible. A valuable tool for the military, but a goal we shouldn't support in civilian life. As for defense against despotism: Taking up arms in defense of our freedom is a basic right and a laudable goal. At the time the 2nd Amendment was ratified, an armed citizen could reasonably expect to have comparable firepower to the military, perhaps even superior firepower if you consider the Kentucky long rifle superior to the smooth bore military musket. (I know the long rifle of the day was often smaller caliber, but it had longer range and greater accuracy.) Even then, of course, the average citizen couldn't afford and generally didn't desire artillery. Did our Founding Fathers imagine heavy machine guns, planes, tanks, smart bombs, and drones when they wrote about civilian militias wielding personal arms to secure the freedom of the state? Should the average civilian have access to Apache helicopters, modern mortars, cruise missiles, Abrams tanks, and Predator drones? Military parity 'just in case'? The question we face is whether the assumed value of a personal assault rifle in resisting the hypothetical threat of a professional military force outweighs the damage being done to our society by putting a weapon capable of such large scale slaughter into the hands of almost anyone on the street that wants one. Does their civilian availability serve more to protect our security or to threaten our security? I'm not saying banning assault weapons is a foregone conclusion or guaranteed solution, I'm just saying allowing them isn't automatically justified either. It's a conversation we need to have as a nation, not one to dismiss at face value. You do know that people use ARs to hunt with??? 11 Best ARs for Deer Hunting in 2014 by Brad Fitzpatrick | February 13th, 20148 AR rifles have grown immensely in popularity, and with good reason. These light-recoiling, durable semiautos make sense not only for military and law enforcement applications, but also for self-defense, competition and target shooting. ARs also make excellent hunting rifles, and there are a growing number of hunters who rely on their ARs to put meat in the freezer. Today, many companies offer ARs that are great for hunting deer. They offer adjustable stocks, different sighting options and the fastest follow-up shot in the business. If you’re thinking of purchasing an AR for your next deer hunt, there are plenty from which to choose. We’ve gathered 10 rifles that offer everything a hunter needs, from lightweight models that are easy to carry, to long-range guns for shots in open country. Check out our list of the best ARs for deer hunting in 2014. Read more: http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/rifles/best-ars-deer-hunting/#ixzz3tbHgzRDQ http://www.northamericanwhitetail.com/rifles/best-ars-deer-hunting/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 You do know that people use ARs to hunt with??? Yes, I know some people hunt with ARs. I've known people to hunt with pistols also. But assault weapons were not invented to hunt with (nor were pistols). They're not in great demand as hunting tools nor essential to hunting because there are better tools for that job. So I don't consider their hunting value sufficient justification for their existence. They exist because they are very good at killing people in numbers with speed and efficiency, the job they were designed to do. Is that a tool we need in the civilian toolbox? I think their danger outweighs their value in civilian life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,802 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 You do know that people use ARs to hunt with??? Yes, I know some people hunt with ARs. I've known people to hunt with pistols also. But assault weapons were not invented to hunt with (nor were pistols). They're not in great demand as hunting tools nor essential to hunting because there are better tools for that job. So I don't consider their hunting value sufficient justification for their existence. They exist because they are very good at killing people in numbers with speed and efficiency, the job they were designed to do. Is that a tool we need in the civilian toolbox? I think their danger outweighs their value in civilian life. When all firearms are potential mass-shooting weapons, the solution does not lie in eliminating categories of weapons, it lies in efforts to prevent the wrong people getting their hands on any type of firearm. That someone can buy as many AR-15's as they wish is not the problem, it is that basically the only consistent disqualifier that turns up on background checks is a felony conviction. It is that private sales do not have to go through background checks at all. You can buy or sell firearms basically anonymously via newspaper classifieds or online forums. I'm not aware of any instances of legal NFA weapons being used in shootings, and there's a reason for that. First, they are more difficult and time-consuming to obtain. Second, the ATF takes a much harder look at you before approving them. Third, they cannot be loaned or sold (transferred) to anyone else without them also going through the same process. All this talk about semi-automatic "assault weapons", and people forget that it is completely legal for any civilian to own automatic weapons, grenade launchers, rocket launchers, suppressors, and short-barreled rifles. You don't hear about them because they are owned by people that went through the NFA process to acquire them, and they cannot be sold freely by the simple means of exchanging cash. If I let someone "borrow" one of my automatic weapons and they are either caught with it or use it in a crime, I am going to prison for nearly a decade regardless of what happens to them. Because of that, not even my closest friends ever touch them anywhere other than a shooting range in my presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 There is no need for Americans to own military assault weapons. Period. I have said this a thousand times. Ask Strych. I've qualified expert on the M2, 240, AT4, M16, and the Mark 19, and sharpshooter on the m4 so it's not like I'm scared of these weapons. I just don't understand why Anericans need assault rifles when shotguns and handguns would be more ideal in home defense. So YOU want to decide how others can defend their home / business ? Seems that way doesn't it. he has a habit of telling others what they should do or believe. Anyone who uses a rifle for home defense is an idiot. Indeed. Biden was right, a shotgun is the best for close quarters. Having the ability to spray the bullets inside a fatal funnel like a door or hallway pretty much ensures you get your man 100 percent out of the time. Its effectiveness is top notch in CQC. The theory that shotguns can be used to mow down large crowds is rather odd though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 This is how I generally see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 You do know that people use ARs to hunt with??? Yes, I know some people hunt with ARs. I've known people to hunt with pistols also. But assault weapons were not invented to hunt with (nor were pistols). They're not in great demand as hunting tools nor essential to hunting because there are better tools for that job. So I don't consider their hunting value sufficient justification for their existence. They exist because they are very good at killing people in numbers with speed and efficiency, the job they were designed to do. Is that a tool we need in the civilian toolbox? I think their danger outweighs their value in civilian life. When all firearms are potential mass-shooting weapons, the solution does not lie in eliminating categories of weapons, it lies in efforts to prevent the wrong people getting their hands on any type of firearm. That someone can buy as many AR-15's as they wish is not the problem, it is that basically the only consistent disqualifier that turns up on background checks is a felony conviction. It is that private sales do not have to go through background checks at all. You can buy or sell firearms basically anonymously via newspaper classifieds or online forums. I'm not aware of any instances of legal NFA weapons being used in shootings, and there's a reason for that. First, they are more difficult and time-consuming to obtain. Second, the ATF takes a much harder look at you before approving them. Third, they cannot be loaned or sold (transferred) to anyone else without them also going through the same process. All this talk about semi-automatic "assault weapons", and people forget that it is completely legal for any civilian to own automatic weapons, grenade launchers, rocket launchers, suppressors, and short-barreled rifles. You don't hear about them because they are owned by people that went through the NFA process to acquire them, and they cannot be sold freely by the simple means of exchanging cash. If I let someone "borrow" one of my automatic weapons and they are either caught with it or use it in a crime, I am going to prison for nearly a decade regardless of what happens to them. Because of that, not even my closest friends ever touch them anywhere other than a shooting range in my presence. I suspect if we make any changes in the way we deal with firearms as a nation, particularly so-called assault weapons, it will be an approach very similar to what you describe: Much tighter background checks/vetting with more rigid standards for qualification, much greater difficulty in acquiring them, more stringent monitoring of those weaoons post-sale including tight security standards on the way the weapons are stored, and tighter restrictions on the transfer of the weapons to second parties including strong penalties for their unauthorized transfer. Personally, I don't have a problem with that or see it as a Constitutional crisis. (Thanks for the update regarding the National Firearms Act. While I knew it existed, I'm not very familiar with it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,122 Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 Then what's the problem ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.