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 recent slaughter of innocent people in this country has people all over the internet telling lies, telling truths, blaming this one, or that one, and I have yet to see this question brought up specifically, on any forum.
The one thing I ask is that you LEAVE POLITICS OUT OT THIS DISCUSSION, and give an honest answer to this question.
If you feel a political answer is your only recourse, then please take it somewhere else.
Question, Why should ordinary citizens be allowed to not only possess, but use military assault weapons, capable of firing multiple rounds per second, as a killing machine of many, at one time?
for one thing you can't pull a trigger multiple rounds per second....
AR-15 has a maximum effective rate of 45 rounds per minute...that's a maximum....you would still have to find the target, hold the target....and be able to pull the trigger that fast
though the point is....that's still a lot...but almost all semi-autos are capable of firing as fast as you can pull the trigger
....that's the point of all of them
The recent slaughter of innocent people in this country has people all over the internet telling lies, telling truths, blaming this one, or that one, and I have yet to see this question brought up specifically, on any forum.
The one thing I ask is that you LEAVE POLITICS OUT OT THIS DISCUSSION, and give an honest answer to this question.
If you feel a political answer is your only recourse, then please take it somewhere else.
Question, Why should ordinary citizens be allowed to not only possess, but use military assault weapons, capable of firing multiple rounds per second, as a killing machine of many, at one time?
Bob.
Those weapons are already banned. Just because it 'LOOKS" like an assault weapon doesn't mean that it is anything more than a typical semi-automatic.
Most hunting rifles and shotguns sold are semi-automatic weapons.
A good exercise for you would be to go to a local gun club and tell them your interested in target shooting and have never fired a gun....which I assume is true in your case given your question.
Get them to give you a tour of facilities and I asked about questions about different types of guns and shooting. Ask to fire a couple of guns....Stay away from politics and you will learn quite a bit.
BTW...all my left-wing liberal friends hunt with semi-automatics. Myself, I has to be a bolt action or a double.
Sorry about the politics, but there are really pissed at the registration of semi-automatics in Washington state.
The phrasing of the question reveals the prejudice and agenda of the OP - so much for the naked lie about an "honest" question.
I'm just assuming that he/she is not up on the fundamentals or performance of firearms technology.
Just imagine the fuss and fury when something like Tracking Point style scopes become cheap. Everybody is a potential sniper. 3d printing and cheap CNC leads you down another path.
It seems to me that a 'safe' society from a firearms standpoint involves mass confiscation of all types of guns and mass surveillance of the population afterwards. This probably needs to be combined with some kind of programmed political philosophy that includes self-policing and involvement of family members and neighbors in law enforcement. Given the push for diversity, it'll have to come from the top instead of being some sort of organic movement.
Ok, that is a better use of the question, now let's have an answer.
So far there hasn't been one answer.
Bob.
As I said, you'll have to better refine your question. Perhaps in terms of rounds per minute including reloading. As mentioned, check out cowboy shooters sometime.
Question, Why should ordinary citizens be allowed to not only possess, but use military assault weapons, capable of firing multiple rounds per second, as a killing machine of many, at one time?
Bob.
I don't think you should be able to for the same reason you shouldn't be able to buy a rocket launcher. I support handguns, rifles, shotguns, self-defense, castle doctrines, but I think we could use more common sense regulations that wouldn't infringe on law abiding citizens with the exception of military grade weapons. With that being said, I think penalties for people who steal weapons, use weapons in crime (whether they shoot or not) need to be A LOT more tough with very long sentences.
Question, Why should ordinary citizens be allowed to not only possess, but use military assault weapons, capable of firing multiple rounds per second, as a killing machine of many, at one time?
Bob.
Just a quick clarification.
This was not a military assault rifle. It was semi, not fully, automatic and cannot fire multiple rounds per second.
The “AR” in “AR-15” rifle stands for ArmaLite rifle, after the company that developed it in the 1950s. “AR” does NOT stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.”
Most people own them for target shooting AND home protection. A rifle is more accurate than a pistol or a revolver and the small bullet .223 generally does not go through walls and put neighbors in danger.
I do not think that AW that you describe is easily available for most of America. I believe that to own something with such capabilities you need to apply to FBI and other federal police agency for special license. The federal check done is very though and the stock is limited meaning expensive.
When I was in Taiwan military, old training Sargent say we used to have M1 Garand. Based on training and practice at range with friends M1, the very old M1 Garand pair with Glock can be just as dangerous.
Both M1 and Glock are not AW.
It's surprising how fast a Garand can be reloaded. It's always been funny how Mini-14's always seem to have a place carved out for them in any proposed law. I think it's to attempt to split the gun owners away from a monolithic attitude.
Heck, I'm surprised these shooters don't just carry a couple of revolvers with speedloaders.
Ok, that is a better use of the question, now let's have an answer.
So far there hasn't been one answer.
Bob.
If you could keep it to that, we might be able to have civil discourse.
I would say, civilly, that there's no valid reason for civilians to own weapons of war or mayhem. At the same time, I believe the SC has ruled previously they can (Heller?). So, let's turn to alternatives.
Just have all weapons of a certain performance level (ability to cause a certain level of harm) required to be registered. Require updated licensing, and the use of violence in the commission of crime would generally have you lose your weapons.
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.