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.
The one number we'll never know in the gun control debate..
How many crimes are prevented and discouraged simply because a law abiding citizen showed their firearm to those individuals who were about to act criminally?
AR-15 an assault weapon/rifle? Did the conservatives who put this story out here change the description of what an assault rifle is now? It never was an assault rifle before, but now it is? You cons sure are confusing.
I gave this example a couple of times and like a broken record here it goes again :
I live in the country and at night the county has 3 sheriff deputies on duty and we are talking about covering a vast amount of miles. Where I live they do not even patrol the area and in most cases it takes up to 20 minutes for them to arrive at the scene.
Now our deputies carry a 9MM handgun and in the trunk is a M16, I own a 9MM handgun and I also own a 9MM rifle/assault weapon? with a 30 clip. So if our deputies need those weapons to protect themselves and the public is not in my best interest to imitate them as best I can? I think this is being smart.
Now one of the posters in this thread lives in a big city and is protecting a very small area and does not need range. What do I mean by range? any hunter will tell you that the range for accuracy for a 12 gage is like 50 to 60 yards. I need more range then that I own 5 acres to protect my land, myself, and animals which is part of my food supply.
Lets just say that there is civil unrest, I think in that scenario you are most unlikely to have just one or two people breaking in your house or stealing your property. What I think we will see is roving gangs and they will be armed. Do you think my household is going to let a gang of people enter the house before we start shooting?
No, that would be kind of stupid would n't it? so I need some range and a rifle that holds a lot of bullets.
I know I wear a tin foil hat because I am a prepper, I stock up food, I have animals to eat and I grow a garden. I have a generator in case the electricity goes out for long periods of time. I have a little silver and gold to barter and I have weapons.
Go ahead and laugh but keep in mind the old saying that at times comes true " he who laughs first ends up laughing last.
Skimmed the article; so he couldn't do this with a .45? He had to use a AR-15. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad he used whatever weapon was close to him to protect both himself and his sister, but this still isn't enough to prove to me why one may need a AR-15.
AR-15 an assault weapon/rifle? Did the conservatives who put this story out here change the description of what an assault rifle is now? It never was an assault rifle before, but now it is? You cons sure are confusing.
Maybe YOU should take an English refresher course. The OP put quotation marks around the words assault rifle like this: "assault rifle".
Well since you want to reply to my post, answer my question. If you had the choice between a Ray Gun/Laser Beam Cannon/Etc would you choose that or the AR-15? The Ray Gun, if built, would be a hell of a lot stronger than the AR-15.
I see that you love the NRA and I can respect that, but I want valid reply on why there shouldn't be restrictions on semi-automatic weapons. You can't say these kids will all of a sudden make Americans changes their mind, it'll just promote that a AR-15 can be a good weapon for all to use from kids, former marines or mass murderers. But their still a problem in this country, and that children can now find guns (such as the kid in CA who shot one of his classmates although he didn't use a semi-automatic, the media can push a agenda on why guns in homes need to be locked better) in their homes and do whatever with them. Logically speaking, I'm pretty sure most democrats can rationally decide that not every gun owner or more specifically semi-automatic gun owner is a terrible person nor is planning on going on a massacre, but that isn't going to change my mind on why they should be banned.
Sorry, who ever said I was the most educated person on the subject? Not I, I'm just stating the obvious but I guess its not obvious enough for you. **** it; allow everyone to have M-16's because then everyone will be able to protect themselves, that's your fantasy anyways. In that post, I was only trying to establish that Americans always want bigger things. If someone broke into my house, why would I shoot them with a pistol if I can shoot them with a mini gun? Its ridiculous and that's why limitations always need to be in place. You never know how crazy I could get with that mini gun, do you? Just because I don't know everything about guns, doesn't mean I haven't shot one in fact I've shot three before so I have some knowledge on them. My grandfather lives in a rural area and keeps his .357 and some rifle in his vehicle at all times so he'll probably side with you guys on some of these issues but even he wouldn't be able to state why he'd need a semi-automatic other than entertainment.
Honestly, who wouldn't want a gun this good? Its amazing. Even I, a anti-assault rifle type of guy would want it. But that doesn't mean I should be able to have it. Its kind of a lust thing I guess, you have to know how to control your wants.
Why a semiautomatic other than entertainment? It's pretty useless to talk to people like you since your mind is clearly made up no matter what anyone says but here goes anyway.
I don't hunt and I know very little about hunting. I'll answer from the perspective of a gun owner who owns guns for self defense (as well as recreational purposes). You have to understand the limited effectiveness of handguns. It usually takes multiple hits from a handgun to stop an attacker. There's an old saying....what does someone usually do after they've been shot with a handgun? Well....Whatever they were doing before they were shot with a handgun. If someone is intent on attacking you usually one hit from a handgun will not stop them. Handguns are also very difficult to handle effectively when compared to rifles. There are several fundamentals to pay attention to and if one of them isn't done correctly you'll miss. It is very difficult to actually put shots on a target with a handgun under the best of circumstances never mind when shooting in the dark under stress. Statistically when shots are fired in a stressful self defense situation only 30% actually hit the intended target. With regard to handguns your two options are semi-automatic or revolver. Most revolvers that would be appropriate for self defense and concealed carry hold 5 shots. 30% of 5 is 1.5 right? Obviously there's no hitting someone with half a shot so call it one. Reloading is seldom an option when the stuff is hitting the fan so then you're standing there with an empty gun as you get attacked. When you read stories of the police shooting at people 15 times there's a reason for that. Revolvers are also based on ergonomics that existed when Billy The Kid was shooting them and due to the mechanisms and the way they function there's not much room to improve there. Semi auto handguns are more complicated to work but are much easier to shoot. The semi auto function of reloading the next cartridge functions on the recoil of the shot that was fired so it causes the shooter to experience less felt recoil. They also hold much more ammunition and are easy to reload quickly even under stress. Some people of limited strength wouldn't be able to handle a revolver that would be appropriate for self defense at all. So now let's talk long guns (rifles and shotguns). To someone of small stature or limited strength shooting a shot gun is like being hit in the shoulder with a sledge hammer. So if you can't shoot a shotgun effectively that leaves rifles as an option and then the same thing applies really in that a bolt action rifle isn't really appropriate for self defense. Now.....quite frankly semi autos are just a lot of fun to shoot for recreational purposes as well. Keep in mind that we have a permanent assault weapons ban in place here in Mass. already (Thanks, Mitt!!!). Is it effective? Does it accomplish anything? I legally own an AR-15 right now. It's not an assault weapon because it doesn't have a bayonet lug or an adjustable stock on it. Sounds silly right? That's because it is. The only thing the AWB really accomplishes is pissing off responsible gun owners because it limits purchase options on certain guns. To be frank once again.....I really think that's the intent of some legislators in the first place.
AR-15 an assault weapon/rifle? Did the conservatives who put this story out here change the description of what an assault rifle is now? It never was an assault rifle before, but now it is? You cons sure are confusing.
Assault rifle: Any firearm that is legal today that liberals want to make illegal as soon as possible. There you have it. That't the definition for all intents and purposes.
That's the great thing about the 2nd amendment it doesn't need to prove to anyone why one needs a weapon.
After reading too many useless gun threads on this forum it is obvious that neither "side" will change the minds of the other side. Ultimately the quote above should be - and actually is - the end of the story.
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.
The one number we'll never know in the gun control debate..
