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.
I know this question makes a lot of people uncomfortable, but nonetheless I think it's worth asking. In the wake of yet another rampage perpetrated by a deranged lunatic with an (assault) rifle, the question is going to be asked and one way or another the gun issue is going to be addressed. Let me preface this by saying I'm not a liberal anti-gun nut who ****s myself at the sight of a gun, but rather a gun owner and an ardent gun rights advocate. I abhor despotic Democrat-run states like New York and New Jersey that de facto prohibit all but the rich and politically connected from owning and carrying firearms. I abhor "gun-free zones" like schools, hospitals, and universities where occupants are disarmed and forced to be victims of an armed intruder. I think everyone who isn't deranged or a criminal should be allowed access to small arms without having to beg for permission and/or pay a ransom to the state. An armed society makes for a polite society. That statement has been proven time and again. Despite what the psychos from New York and California will tell you, most people are less likely to engage in anti-social behavior when they have to back up said behavior with their life.
That being said, as a rational thinking human being I also abhor the idea of a deranged lunatic going on a killing spree with an assault rifle. The system is supposed to keep criminals and mental ill from accessing deadly weapons, yet the very system has failed time and again. Spree killings are not only getting more and more frequent, but also more and more deadly. The first one I'm old enough to remember, that sent the nation into collective shock was Columbine, and sadly if that happened today it wouldn't even register as so many more deadly spree killings have taken place since. I've heard all of the arguments in favor or rifles and have made some of them in the past to the anti-gun left, but the more I think about the topic, the more specious the pro-rifle arguments appear to me.
First of all, the AR-15 is in neither a hunting rifle nor sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle. It was developed for the military for the purpose of cover fire. The variant sold to civilians is semi-automatic, while the models used by the military are select-fire. That's the only difference, otherwise they're one and the same. An AR-15 makes a poor choice for a hunting rifle and even worse for self-defense. If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, you're going to shoot them with an AR-15? Do you not realize that even if you aim the rifle accurately the bullet has so much force that it will exit your target, go through a wall and kill one of your family members? The best weapon for home and self-defense is a pistol with hollow point ammo. You think you're going to use your rifle to fend off a government siege? Please, the government has enough manpower and firepower to wipe you off the face of the earth and every record that you ever existed. It's insane to think that you can fight the government with a rifle. Like I said before, the system can't seem to keep these weapons out of the hands of deranged people, so maybe it's time to take them off the market. I understand that they're fun to own and to operate, and I enjoy target shooting as much as the next person, but if we can't keep them out of the hands of crazy people, then perhaps we have the duty to get rid of them for the common good. Thoughts?
First of all, the AR-15 is in neither a hunting rifle nor sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle.
First of all, you're completely wrong. It is absolutely both a sporting and hunting rifle and is absolutely not an "assault rifle". Millions of people use variants of the AR-15 for hunting, it's an excellent choice for varmint hunting. Let me guess, the AR15 is evil and no one needs it, but the Ruger Mini 14 is just fine.
You claim "I'm not a liberal anti-gun nut who ****s myself at the sight of a gun" but you sure sound like one.
I agree on the AR-15. However Rifles should be allowed as long as the background check comes back OK.
agree....
I have no problem with background checks...just wish the liberals would allow the mental health records to go into it, instead of screaming hippa violations
the NRA has even said it doesn't mind background checks too include mental stability in those background checks
liberals argue against adding the mental part of the background checks....they spin that it will be a violation of HIPPA
it doesn't have to affect hippa at all.... you go for a gun... instant 5 minute background check happens...comes back as code 99(or what ever)...."sorry sir, I can not sell this to you at this time, please check with the NSA you got this code (I don't know what the codes mean) you case number is this, please straighten out the issue before you return"
simple yes?
but noooo, liberals have to complain that it would be a violation of hippa
the problem is mental illness, not the amount of guns out there
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.
