Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does the number of rounds in the "clip" determine with a gun is for "recreational use." Wouldn't that pretty much be determined by the intent of the owner? If a shopkeeper buys a 1911 45 ACP pistol that holds seven rounds, to protect against robbery, it's not for recreational use, is it? But if a guy buys an AR that holds 30 rounds, for purposes of entering a rifle competition, then that's "recreational use."
AR's that hold 30 rounds should only be in the hands of the police or military, not civilians.
AR's that hold 30 rounds should only be in the hands of the police or military, not civilians.
Why? If a law abiding citizen wants to own a weapon that holds 30 rounds in the magazine, why should that be prohibited? Empirical evidence shows that these types of firearms are used in a very small percentage of assaults, so how does limiting their ownership make any difference in gun crimes?
Typically the many are never severely penalized for the actions of the very few who are not part of society. That has been the case in these shootings. Safeguards are put in place to limit the actions of deviants and they do affect the law abiding but one does not deny the law abiding a right to constrain others who act outside the law.
I think that is the principle behind law in the USA.
This rightfully should be more of a case on how to constrain the mentally unstable from commiting crimes. I think a case can be made for this stretching back to Columbine. Mass shootings in the USA a rarity before although there was the "Postal" monicker a few years prior to that.
Why? If a law abiding citizen wants to own a weapon that holds 30 rounds in the magazine, why should that be prohibited? Empirical evidence shows that these types of firearms are used in a very small percentage of assaults, so how does limiting their ownership make any difference in gun crimes?
They used semi-automatic weapons with multiple rounds in just about every mass murder, VA Tech, Aurora, etc, Yes weapons with multiple round magazines should be restricted.
You can own cars and not hold a lic to operate one.
You only need a Lic to drive one on the public streets.
remember you can hire a driver if you don't or can't drive.
I can own a plane too and not have a pilot lic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn
One needs a driver's license to buy a car, don't they? Besides, your analogy is bogus.
Im all for a more stringent record keeping and such but I'm not for limiting what I can own.
But all the laws and restrictions do not stop the criminal or the mentally ill.
I think this all starts with poor parenting and the little value some put on human life.
If you want to change things, start at home.
Until then we need to arm our selves.
Going to get my permit to acquire ahead of time
This allows me to buy for a year with having to wait a week.
my wife wants a pocket gun and she wants to get her CC permit also.
I think you are helping to make the case for banning weapons like this.
Weapons like what??
Did you even read my post? Anyone even moderately familiar with a weapon, with the right equipment, can put 30 rounds downrange in 2 minutes with any weapon. If that is to be the definition of "assault weapon" you've just labeled every firearm an "assault weapon".
They used semi-automatic weapons with multiple rounds in just about every mass murder, VA Tech, Aurora, etc, Yes weapons with multiple round magazines should be restricted.
You didn't answer my question, which was "How is banning these firearms going to stop gun related crimes?"
At Columbine, there were no "assault weapons" used, but the perpetrators still managed to kill 12 people and injure 21 more. All of the weapons used carried less than 30 rounds.
At Virginia Tech, the firearms used were a .22-caliber Walther P22 semi-automatic handgun and a 9 mm semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun. Neither of these has a 30 round magazine, yet the perpetrator managed to kill 31 people and injure 17 others.
At Aurora, CO, the high-capacity magazine for the one and only "assault rifle" that was used jammed after firing less than 30 rounds. The perpetrator then switched to using a handgun. The shotgun that he started shooting with did not carry 30 rounds and would not have fallen under the category of "assault weapon" as defined in the dismal legislative failure that was the 1994 assault weapons ban.
Now that you have a few facts about the crimes that you erroneously used to try to prove an invalid point, please answer my question: "How will banning firearms with a 30 round magazine from the general, law-abiding public stop gun related crimes?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
