Matthew Temkin
Member
We do not need semi automatic firearms with large magazines.
We desire them.
And that is all the reasons that we have to give our government.
We desire them.
And that is all the reasons that we have to give our government.
Why Americans need Assault Weapons
- Thread starter gym
- Start date
- Status
Obama, Feinstein and the rest of the gun banners consider a pistol with an eleven round magazine to be an "assault weapon." Law abiding citizens limited to from 7-10 rounds will be at a serious disadvantage when confronted by criminals with high capacity magazines and who, undoubtedly, will ignore magazine limits. The cops found this to be true and we will too.
LiveLife
Member
If criminals can get the drugs they want into the country with ATF/LE watching the borders, they will get all the illegal magazines they want.
Not too long ago, they caught an ocean liner container full of AK-47s ... now that's only one container ... imagine how many containers get through each year and how many illegal AK-47s/magazines they hold each.
Criminals and gang members WILL have their guns and magazines if they want ... law abding citizens won't.
Not too long ago, they caught an ocean liner container full of AK-47s ... now that's only one container ... imagine how many containers get through each year and how many illegal AK-47s/magazines they hold each.
Criminals and gang members WILL have their guns and magazines if they want ... law abding citizens won't.
helitack32f1
Member
I think AR's and AK's are great weapons and really cool toys. But please let's not get hysterical and that think should we lose them the end of the world is nigh. We can manage just fine with the older fashioned weapons. Really we can.
This sentiment is all fine and dandy if you assume the ban wold stop with AR's and AK's. Next, the people that matter will start spreading the "fact" that we banned so called assault weapons because of how dangerous they are but the" fact" is, handguns kill far more people than assault rifles ever did. This will be pointed out after the next mass shooting. Obviously, if AR's are dangerous and we banned them, we must ban something MORE dangerous such as handguns!
After that, it will be brought up that hunting rifles use a much more powerful cartridge than AR's or AK's ever did. Why should that be allowed?
It will never end until the rest of the country is a shining example of gun free, death free utopia like Chicago. Or Sandy Hook Elementary.
Pismo, maybe that is true in CA, but the rest of the country, Where ther are few Orientals, "other than port cities" experienced an uptick in home invasion type crimes. Even pastors of local churches have been hit. Mine was far from the exception. Criminals are better armed now than ever, why shuldn't they be, it's their line of work. If you are going to be in life and death situations, you want to have the advantage. That's why gangs use AK's as their weapon of choice. And it's "crews" who committ home invasions that specialize in this kind of work.
Mo's are distinct, home invasion crews are on the rise, in many states.Especially wealthy suburbs. If they meet resistance they may need to shoot their way out, the also know that homeowners in some states are better armed than they were when I carried a model 60 S&W, I still say youre statement is bogus.
In CA you guys realy don't have access to the type of weapons that other states see everyware. Maybe it's different in different parts of the country, but criminals as a whole will get whatever they need to do the job.
The 5 man crew who got me were all whit boys, as a matter of fact they were FBI informants.
Mo's are distinct, home invasion crews are on the rise, in many states.Especially wealthy suburbs. If they meet resistance they may need to shoot their way out, the also know that homeowners in some states are better armed than they were when I carried a model 60 S&W, I still say youre statement is bogus.
In CA you guys realy don't have access to the type of weapons that other states see everyware. Maybe it's different in different parts of the country, but criminals as a whole will get whatever they need to do the job.
The 5 man crew who got me were all whit boys, as a matter of fact they were FBI informants.
ApacheCoTodd
member
Why do we need that class of weapons?
The Wall Street Journal today (Saturday) has an outstanding article about the success of "masked" vigilantes/militias coping with the breakdown of local and federal law enforcement as well as the military in dealing with organized crime in various parts of the country. Repeatedly mentioned were the "AR" along with standard farm guns in taking their towns back from the thugs.
For those who would naturally crow "that can't happen here!" I would say that they should get a grip on their hubris and note that their betters and elders have whistled past the graveyard with this in the past - to their peril and doom.
The Wall Street Journal today (Saturday) has an outstanding article about the success of "masked" vigilantes/militias coping with the breakdown of local and federal law enforcement as well as the military in dealing with organized crime in various parts of the country. Repeatedly mentioned were the "AR" along with standard farm guns in taking their towns back from the thugs.
For those who would naturally crow "that can't happen here!" I would say that they should get a grip on their hubris and note that their betters and elders have whistled past the graveyard with this in the past - to their peril and doom.
Just for the record, that was in Mexico. We won't need to resort to local militias to defend us. Obama's Homeland Security, with their recent purchase of 1.7 billion rounds of .40 cal. hollow points, and billions more of 5.56, will keep us all safe. In a pig's eye!!!
SFsc616171
Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Messages
- 213
When anybody says, "we need this ...", count me out. If YOU believe that YOU have the requirement for an AR/AK/SKS, ok, I'll buy that, and support your right to it.
I own semi-auto pistols, and have had good range days, and Murphy range days. When you have an opponent, you need NOT a Murphy day. Therefore, for a rifle, I would choose a levergun over a semi-auto. (Three years SouthEast Asia experience with semi's were enough.)
Somebody wrote about shooting somebody with body armor. (That's tacticool). The average American won't be meeting that sort of thing, even if it all goes bad. I believe that when a .45-70 projectile is launched, and NOT at something that would end up on the dinner plate, a Murphy day at the other end of that trajectory, has just been written on ol' Somebody's calendar!
I own semi-auto pistols, and have had good range days, and Murphy range days. When you have an opponent, you need NOT a Murphy day. Therefore, for a rifle, I would choose a levergun over a semi-auto. (Three years SouthEast Asia experience with semi's were enough.)
Somebody wrote about shooting somebody with body armor. (That's tacticool). The average American won't be meeting that sort of thing, even if it all goes bad. I believe that when a .45-70 projectile is launched, and NOT at something that would end up on the dinner plate, a Murphy day at the other end of that trajectory, has just been written on ol' Somebody's calendar!
klover
Member
Perfect! If I get a laser beam rifle of the future, I will not
even want my 30 rounders.
Let's act:
even want my 30 rounders.
Let's act:
Pismopal
Member
You are exactly correct and we do not need to justify the constitution...it is the law. Many of the Bill of Rights have bad results but for the overall good they remain..as they must. This country is subject to change..drastic change for the worse. This was why we were given the right to keep and bear arms...not for shooting deer.
PedalBiker
Member
1. 223 ammunition is less likely to ricochet
2. Rifles are easier to hit with = less miss potential
3. 223 ammunition is less likely to over penetrate
4. Semi auto is more likely to be successfully deployed by an injured or disabled person.
5. Medium intensity rounds have less recoil.
6. Box magazine can be more easily removed to render the weapon safe.
7. Box magazine can be more easily inserted to render the weapon active.
These funky looking rifles rifles are safer, more effective and accessible to more people.
They are just plain made for self defense. If you really want to kill a lot of people there are far better ways, plus you're more likely to escape the event undetected.
2. Rifles are easier to hit with = less miss potential
3. 223 ammunition is less likely to over penetrate
4. Semi auto is more likely to be successfully deployed by an injured or disabled person.
5. Medium intensity rounds have less recoil.
6. Box magazine can be more easily removed to render the weapon safe.
7. Box magazine can be more easily inserted to render the weapon active.
These funky looking rifles rifles are safer, more effective and accessible to more people.
They are just plain made for self defense. If you really want to kill a lot of people there are far better ways, plus you're more likely to escape the event undetected.
PedalBiker
Member
A $300 mail order item is super rare????
It is not for the government and its anti-gun minions to ask why we need any particular type of gun. It's for them to justify their intention of banning it, and in the case of AR type rifles they have failed miserably and comically. An example of their libelous doltish lies is Obama ranting that there is no place in society for these military weapons. This is a stupid lie on two counts. The AR style rifles are not in the least military weapons but civilian rifles great for nearly every use, and American civilians have commonly used military weapons since 1776... the many iterations of the Mauser and the Colt 1911 are but two examples. As long as they promote this tripe, how dare they ask why we need anything.
Now, of course, The OP's title is bit overwrought. "Why Americans Need Assault Weapons." There's quite of bit of different interpretations out there, but going grammar Nazi about it isn't helping. And taking the worst possible version as your view? That isn't discussion, it really all about social dominance.
If anything, that is the REAL fight. The banners readily admit it's not about the gun, or even that they can make it happen, it's a symbol of their fight to dominate US. Make the gun go away, WE lose, they WIN. They have more dominance and power.
So, all the infighting and nitpicking just helps them. They want to take them ALL away, whether it's an "assault weapon" or not. Just like Britain, the intent is to disarm the population, then they have no resort when much more onerous policies are proposed. What you gonna do when they say "You are all going to receive the exact same paycheck, after all, it's only fair and levels the playing field."
Not possible? Oh, my, look closer, some countries DO that. Like it or not. They also have NO guns. Goes hand in hand.
Get off the high horse about whether somebody NEEDs something. All you do is put down our one American right above all others - freedom of choice. Doing that is really undermining the rights of all citizens, and that isn't good.
You don't tell me what I need. You are not the boss of me. If you want to have that power, that means others lose it - and so can you by the same process.
If anything, that is the REAL fight. The banners readily admit it's not about the gun, or even that they can make it happen, it's a symbol of their fight to dominate US. Make the gun go away, WE lose, they WIN. They have more dominance and power.
So, all the infighting and nitpicking just helps them. They want to take them ALL away, whether it's an "assault weapon" or not. Just like Britain, the intent is to disarm the population, then they have no resort when much more onerous policies are proposed. What you gonna do when they say "You are all going to receive the exact same paycheck, after all, it's only fair and levels the playing field."
Not possible? Oh, my, look closer, some countries DO that. Like it or not. They also have NO guns. Goes hand in hand.
Get off the high horse about whether somebody NEEDs something. All you do is put down our one American right above all others - freedom of choice. Doing that is really undermining the rights of all citizens, and that isn't good.
You don't tell me what I need. You are not the boss of me. If you want to have that power, that means others lose it - and so can you by the same process.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
