-
Welcome Visitors!
Click here to join the community today! Registering is free and it only takes a minute!
Semi-automatic rifles, automatic assault rifles - question
- Thread starter BIRDMAN
- Start date
DrkSide
Full Access Member
I have looked at this thread a couple of times and decided to wait until I could get an argument together. I do not hunt and only use my firearms for sport at the range and personal protection. I don't feel that I should have to justify the way my firearms look with the government because lets face it, with the exception of the removable magazine no other change is based on function, instead based with the look of the firearm. The truth is I am not against new legislation if, and only if, it can be proven to curtail the shootings and not infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights. However, being a realist, I know that a so called "assault weapons ban" will do nothing to solve the problem. This legislation is only a kneejerk reaction to the current happenings and has no basis other than to make a portion of the population to "feel safe." The problem that a weapons ban produces is when the next shooting is done with another semi-auto rifle that does not fall into this made up "assault weapons" criteria the same people that are yelling for control now will do the same.
So where does it stop? Once precedent is made they will continue to narrow the scope of weapons that are legal. Certain politicians have already stated that they will not stop until all guns are illegal, yet these are the people that others say we should trust when they tell the media that they will stop with "assault weapons."
I know you said that you did not want a political answer, however the problem is based in politics and not truth.
So where does it stop? Once precedent is made they will continue to narrow the scope of weapons that are legal. Certain politicians have already stated that they will not stop until all guns are illegal, yet these are the people that others say we should trust when they tell the media that they will stop with "assault weapons."
I know you said that you did not want a political answer, however the problem is based in politics and not truth.
SilvrSRT10
Super Moderator
We aren't dealing with logic. We are dealing with an irrational people who feel they must do something even when it's proven that it doesn't do a thing. An assault weapons ban will only be words written on a piece of paper. It will not actually do anything. But it will make them feel better and all the other emotional people feel safer. Has it made our schools any safer? No. Has it gotten any guns out of criminals hands? No. But if they can take that gun from you then all is right with their world. So it WILL depend on someone else's belief. That's why you can't walk into Walmart and buy a full auto machine gun. Someone else has already decided that we shouldn't have it. Not without additional expense and regulation. What we are waiting on now is if they are going to raise the bar to include semi-auto weapons.
Arkansasguns
Full Access Member
Alright my non-political and not long thought answer, for now. Peace of mind. I know that if I were to be assaulted I have equal ground on the man breaking into my home. I also hunt with these weapons. Sometimes a second shot is needed and a bolt action would be too slow to get it off. I spend quite a bit if time in the woods. How would I stop the feral hogs that are prominent in my area? What if I happen across a bear? Animal with rabies? I don't want to be depending on one shot with a moving target coming toward me. I also feel my time on a range is therapeutic. It helps me relax like nothing else. Also what about the event of a nature disaster and people start looting and going nuts? I would think it would be a good detergent even if I don't use it and even better protection if, God forbid, I have to use it. These is just a quick response, I would have to think about it to come up with my complete answer.
Hey Birdman, I believe you stated in an earlier post that you define "assault weapons" as an automatic rifle. Full-auto rifles allow the gun to continue to fire while the trigger is being depressed. For the most part, without special permits, you cannot buy one, legally.
The attack on "assault weapons" has been going on here in CA for awhile. We have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Still, our homicide by gun rate is the highest. Why? Because the people that cause the majority of the crimes don't follow the laws. They aren't buying them in gun stores. They aren't going through background checks. They are not worried about following the law. Creating mire laws isn't going to change that.
Let's take the government out of this, for sake of argument. There are numerous criminal types here in SoCal. They have access to high capacity magazines(and all the other details that make a rifle illegal in CA) and full auto guns on the black market. Say all us responsible, law abiding citizens turn in our semi-auto, CA-legal, "assault rifles". Then all the bad guys know they have superior firepower to the good guys. Why do I not have the right to own similar firepower to defend my life and my family? Should something like the Watts or LA riots happen again what do I have to defend myself? A bolt action, and a handgun?
BTW more people are killed with handguns than assault rifles. I'm betting those handguns were not purchased legally. What type of person would commit a crime with their own weapon?
As I have stated before the 2nd Amendment calls for the citizens of the country to be as well armed as a military force. We need to be able to protect ourselves if the government can't. It may never happen but I feel confident there are enough people with that same mindset to protect all the pro gun control people should the SHTF.
Let me ask this question Birdman...doesn't it trouble you that Russia and China want our country disarmed? It seems to me that would be a wake-up call to the gun control advocates. I'm honestly asking for feedback because I cannot get my mind around how any person can be in agreement with those 2 countries. Do people think that China and Russia really care about the amount of people killed by gun violence in the US?
The attack on "assault weapons" has been going on here in CA for awhile. We have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Still, our homicide by gun rate is the highest. Why? Because the people that cause the majority of the crimes don't follow the laws. They aren't buying them in gun stores. They aren't going through background checks. They are not worried about following the law. Creating mire laws isn't going to change that.
Let's take the government out of this, for sake of argument. There are numerous criminal types here in SoCal. They have access to high capacity magazines(and all the other details that make a rifle illegal in CA) and full auto guns on the black market. Say all us responsible, law abiding citizens turn in our semi-auto, CA-legal, "assault rifles". Then all the bad guys know they have superior firepower to the good guys. Why do I not have the right to own similar firepower to defend my life and my family? Should something like the Watts or LA riots happen again what do I have to defend myself? A bolt action, and a handgun?
BTW more people are killed with handguns than assault rifles. I'm betting those handguns were not purchased legally. What type of person would commit a crime with their own weapon?
As I have stated before the 2nd Amendment calls for the citizens of the country to be as well armed as a military force. We need to be able to protect ourselves if the government can't. It may never happen but I feel confident there are enough people with that same mindset to protect all the pro gun control people should the SHTF.
Let me ask this question Birdman...doesn't it trouble you that Russia and China want our country disarmed? It seems to me that would be a wake-up call to the gun control advocates. I'm honestly asking for feedback because I cannot get my mind around how any person can be in agreement with those 2 countries. Do people think that China and Russia really care about the amount of people killed by gun violence in the US?
I like this point.
Again, I think it is more about the number of people killed in any one incident, not the total yearly killed across the US. Those high killed numbers are from rifles and seems to be what gun control advocates are focusing on.
Where can I buy my howitzer, nuclear bombs, tanks, and grenades?
Frankly, if we have to fight our military, they have better stuff and I'm moving to Costa Rica. Your AR-15 isn't going to do squat.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
oppo
Full Access Member
Automatic and semiautomatic are 2 very different things. Automatic firearms are highly regulated.
Assualt is not a type of firearm. It is what some people do with one.
As for need, they do make excellent hunting rifles, especially for some times of hunting where fast follow up shots are very advantageous. They also have less recoil than a bolt action, lever action or single shot.
Now, something many people fail to understand. Handguns are very poor stoppers. They are also much more difficult to shoot accurately. Depending on your need to move through your home and navigate doordoorways, a semiautomatic rifle is a far superior tool for home defense to a handgun. With the right ammo, there is also less of a threat from overpenetration.
Take a look at history and you will see that hunting arms have always followed military arms.
One more thing. Imagine yourself as a shop owner during a riot. What would you want?
Assualt is not a type of firearm. It is what some people do with one.
As for need, they do make excellent hunting rifles, especially for some times of hunting where fast follow up shots are very advantageous. They also have less recoil than a bolt action, lever action or single shot.
Now, something many people fail to understand. Handguns are very poor stoppers. They are also much more difficult to shoot accurately. Depending on your need to move through your home and navigate doordoorways, a semiautomatic rifle is a far superior tool for home defense to a handgun. With the right ammo, there is also less of a threat from overpenetration.
Take a look at history and you will see that hunting arms have always followed military arms.
One more thing. Imagine yourself as a shop owner during a riot. What would you want?
I agree on both points.
The number of dead is horrible. But CA doesn't allow assault weapons but we have the highest gun homicide rate in the country. No mags over 10 Rrd. Need a tool to eject a mag. Evil people will find a way to take the lives of innocents. Even with a single shot rifle in a well concealed location a trained shooter can kill numerous innocent people.
Of course I don't think we would ever fight our own military. I also don't believe our own military would fight against its own civilian population. If that ever happens the number of bullets per mag or the type of firearm you can legally own will be the least of our worries,
Last edited:
I can't call him a troll just yet. He seems open to different viewpoints. That's more than I can say for others I have discussed this with lately. I'm hoping I can educate some people in why we need our guns. Yes, for me it's a need.
fyredawg
New member
I don't believe he is implying the idea of fighting our armed forces or a tyrannical government entirely.
My interpretation of the statement is to be as well equipped as possible having some parody with them for any future dangers that threaten our countries existence and join the fight if ever it was to reach our shores.
Have fun in Costa Rica...will you be giving up your citizenship?
Last edited:
BIRDMAN
New member
It does trouble me if other countries want the US disarmed, yes.
Sent from my thumbs using Tapatalk 2
RangerDanger
Full Access Member
Maybe instead of banning certain firearms there could be a required course to complete before owning lets say an AR-15. Just like having to attend a course to get a concealed carry permit. After going to a local gun store and seeing some of the people that were buying guns in this frenzy it was a little scary. I'd feel better with some kind of training/course required than I would with them banned. Hopefully I'll never need mine for home protection but its comforting knowing that I can have firepower close to the equivalent of criminals
Mike Hammer
New member
The rifle is a better tool, hands down then a hand gun.
It's been said never bring a hand gun to a gun fight.
There is only one reason we use handguns and that's because they are convenient, they are small, light weight and you can conceal them on a human. One would look silly with an AK47 under the shirt.
No one knows what the future holds. A case like Katrina is a perfect example. Something like that happens, you're on your own.
I would want to defend with the better tool and that's the rifle. It's easier to aim because its mounted to a shoulder, shoots a more powerful bullet, has reduced recoil and can cover a greater distance.
It's been said never bring a hand gun to a gun fight.
There is only one reason we use handguns and that's because they are convenient, they are small, light weight and you can conceal them on a human. One would look silly with an AK47 under the shirt.
No one knows what the future holds. A case like Katrina is a perfect example. Something like that happens, you're on your own.
I would want to defend with the better tool and that's the rifle. It's easier to aim because its mounted to a shoulder, shoots a more powerful bullet, has reduced recoil and can cover a greater distance.
Last edited:
