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.
This " assault weapon" thing has been around before. I would have to see how any bill was constructed in order to comment on the 2nd amendment thing. It seems to me the 1st amendment could come in here when the right to assemble , danger to the public at large, several wordings. freedom of speech, whatever
No matter how it's worded, an infringement on the 2nd Amendment is an infringement. Your right to carry has nothing to do with the right to assemble or freedom of speech, other than that they are both granted by the Bill of Rights. The right to carry granted to law abiding citizens is not a danger to the public at large, either, except in cases of gross negligence, and the same can be said about driving a car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darstar
I know you do not agree about the Bushmaster because it is not automatic. I owned one years ago , it was Fun to shoot when we went off shore in our sailboat. It fitts every Military requirement except the auto think , right ?
Actually, in the caliber that was allegedly used at Sandy Hook, it doesn't fit the intermediate round category or the range criteria either. Not to say someone couldn't take a 1000 yd shot with a .223, but if they can they're a better shot than I ever was, and at one point in my life I was one heck of a marksman (I made money hunting coyotes, gophers, etc. when I was a teenager and into my early twenties). The only 2 things on the list that fit the Bushmaster are a shoulder-stock and a detachable magazine.
Granted, the intermediate round criteria may be open to some interpretation, depending on whether you consider "power" to be describing the amount of powder in the round (which makes it comparable to a standard rifle round) or the size of the bullet (which is smaller than a standard rifle round). Generally, power is interchangeable with propulsive force, which is the first definition.
I tried very hard, but I can't think of any reason why a law abiding citizen would want to own an assault weapon. If your true motive for owning a gun is to protect yourself, why isn't a normal gun good enough? What's next, your own miniature nuclear bomb under the guise of "Second Amendment rights"? Where does it stop?
For some, they are just fun to shoot. Some people really enjoy firing off bullets at paper targets. Semi-auto, magazine feed rifles are fun to shoot.
Now, a smaller minority wants these arms for a certain type of defensive use. Arms such as AR-15s and AK-47s, the semi-auto versions, are great defensive guns, this is why we arm our military with them. Their defensive usage though really would only be needed in very specific instances. Many folks see the government as something that can't protect them 24/7. When folks start visualizing the LA Riots, the Benton Harbor riots, Watts riots, Katrina issues, G8 riots, etc., a few things become clear: #1-The government will abandoned the area if things are too dangerous. #2-If you are in an area with millions, even just a few hundred rioting people can be extremely dangerous to you or your loved ones.
This is where "assault weapons" really come into play. For those times when help (ie: The government) isn't coming, and the bad guys are running in packs and their numbers are huge. This is when having thirty bullets at the ready (AR-15) beats having only seven (lever action rifle) or five (bolt action rifle). I believe this is basically the reason many own these rifles for self-defense. Some admit it, some won't. There is this valid fear out there that civil unrest happens, it has happened in the past, and it will happen again. The question we have is: Should the fact that civil unrest occurs, where government abandons their duty to protect people, be a reason to allow the ownership of semi-automatic rifles feed by magazines that hold 20, 30, or maybe even 100 rounds?
Hi-cap semi-auto weapons are meant for suppressing fire. If your goal is to take down a person, a nice bolt-action rifle in 300 RUM is your best bet, as far as accuracy and power over range goes; plus a consistent drop past 500yd. If a body count is the top priority you're best off looking into ordnance solutions. The top school mass murder still remains Bath Elementary, which was done with a device in the basement of the building plus a car bomb. That's the way to go, provided you're not looking to do suicide by cop at the end.
Hi-cap semi-auto weapons are meant for suppressing fire. If your goal is to take down a person, a nice bolt-action rifle in 300 RUM is your best bet, as far as accuracy and power over range goes; plus a consistent drop past 500yd. If a body count is the top priority you're best off looking into ordnance solutions. The top school mass murder still remains Bath Elementary, which was done with a device in the basement of the building plus a car bomb. That's the way to go, provided you're not looking to do suicide by cop at the end.
High capacity semi-automatic weapons are also very good in defending one's self from attack. Especially when they are in the 12-gauge or .50 BMG caliber. When seconds count, I would rather not waste it on a bolt-action rifle. The Turkish made Akdal Model 1919 AR-style 12-gauge shotgun is a fine example.
In light of what happened in Newtown where those poor little kids were sitting ducks for a crazy person with a Bushmaster, I think that type of gun makes it too easy for the shooter.Kill quickly, not much aiming needed..... If we only had flint locks, where the shooter only got 1 shot Then having too reload over and over would have given the victims a better chance.
On the other hand, modern hand guns work the same way( semi auto). They would be even easer to use because of size. I would guess most crimes by hand guns far and away out play anything else as popular killers.
I knew that about the Saigas and 20 round drums. I hadn't seen the Akdal yet. Thanks for showing me.
Either sit right on the red line of what the ATF considers a "Destructive Device".....it's very very close.
If I had the money...that's what I would run out and buy right now. Centerfire rifles are a dime a dozen.
Something like that is going to be worth BUTTLOADS $$$$$$$$$$!
I want one too. Currently I carry a Mossberg pump, but the Akdal would be far more efficient at stopping a charging brown bear if loaded with slugs.
They also make a bolt-action .50 BMG AR-style variant, and while that certainly has the stopping power I am looking for, it is far too slow. I can empty a 10 round magazine in about 5 seconds.
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.
