The great gun-control debate

[akimbo1013]

\, to own a full auto AR, you have to have a class3 license which are expensive and difficult to get.

Its really not that hard to get a class 3 license, its like $250 and some paperwork but it takes like 3-6 months. I think full auto assault rifles are completely unnecessary, but whats even more ridiculous are silencers, theres no reason for a civilian to have a silencer. check out this link
Shooters Depot - NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT (“Class 3” weapons ) LEGALITIES

[Animosity]

Guns should never be banned, there is both positive and negative outcomes to banning or letting citizens own guns.

But if we ban weapons, it may slow down crime, but people WILL find a way to get ahold of these weapons. We need guns for self-defense, we need them for hunting, we need them for war. What if we ban guns withen a country and we get invaded by the millions? Then what happens? We're FUCKED!

But there's 100 different prespectives to see it from, this is mine...and i'm sticking with it until the day I die.

[wickerbill]

Hi Akimbo, my point about the ars was that practically any semi can be converted to auto, I haven't stayed current with licensing laws, but ,having checked out FFL license a few years back as compared to when I got one over 20 yrs. ago it is much more cumbersome with much more red tape, that said, there are collectors ,as you probably know, that collect military weapons exclusively, and they are sticklers about authenticity ie: if it was supposed to have full auto capability they want it, they may never fire the weapon they want it original for historical trueness, and you must admit that the ATF does not make it a walk in the park to get a class 3. The ease or difficulty that is involved in obtaining any firearms license isn't the point, gun ownership is, and what types of guns should be legal is, I content that if someone wants a full auto ,that they need not have an assault rifle, that sporting arms will kill you just as dead and just as fast as an assault rifle so where should the line be drawn? How do you distinguish who will use the gun responsibly and who will not? How much more gov't regs are we willing to bear? The bad guys get the media coverage, but the millions of gun owners who live their lives peacefully don't. When was the last time anyone here was threatened by an assault rifle wielding nut?

[akimbo1013]

Bill I agree with you, in that someone who is gonna use an assault rifle illegally will get it by illegal means. The license might be kinda easy to get but the guns are still extremely expensive and the only people buying them are gun collectors. You should look through that link I put up, its pretty crazy what all you can get. My favorite is the silenced sniper rifle specifically designed to fit into this bag that looks like an ordinary piece of luggage. What possible legal use could that have. Its like smoking tobacco out of your "water pipe" I'm not anti-gun in the least, just some guns are just pointless and dangerous for civilians to have

[Mississippi Steve]

Bill I agree with you, in that someone who is gonna use an assault rifle illegally will get it by illegal means. The license might be kinda easy to get but the guns are still extremely expensive and the only people buying them are gun collectors. You should look through that link I put up, its pretty crazy what all you can get. My favorite is the silenced sniper rifle specifically designed to fit into this bag that looks like an ordinary piece of luggage. What possible legal use could that have. Its like smoking tobacco out of your "water pipe" I'm not anti-gun in the least, just some guns are just pointless and dangerous for civilians to have

IMHO, assault weapons and supressors are designed and manufactured specifically as weapons of war. There was never any thought about these weapons being used for sport. They were designed specifically for the purpose of killing men at war.

OTOH, revolvers, rifles and shotguns are designed for hunting for meat, self defense, and sport shooting.

No matter what the purpose, without proficiency, you might as well use a club.

[Humboldt215]

If you can get past my 2 trained attack dogs then defeat me with my weapons, you can have them!

Bravo Zulu!

[Nailhead]

If you believe that then you are very naive , your goverment does not fear you in the least and if there was an uprising you can bet your bottom dollar that they would stamp on it just like them there Yankees did when the south decided they wanted freedom from the north.

If guns weren't so freely available then perhaps the US would see less school massacres and accidental deaths.

More guns means it's easier for the retards to get hold of them.

Thank you, you just proved my point. The US government doesn't fear the people because they have done a damn good job at taking away our only means of defense against unconstitutional actions. Freedom is not given to us by our government, freedom is natural and the constitution's purpose is not to state what freedoms we are allowed to have, but to restrict the government from taking away the freedoms we are entitled to as human beings.

The 2nd amendment was not put there because people needed them for hunting, they needed, and wanted, them to keep the government in check. The 2nd amendment is key to keeping this government as a republic, and not a fascist state.

I'm really surprised by what a vast majority supports allowing assault weapons. Would anybody like to enlighten me as to why you feel they're necessary? Assault weapons are generally automatic right?
I just don't understand it. Having Ak's available, you could mow down 30 people with ease and take on a whole group of cops. I would think handguns, shotguns, and rifles are more than sufficient for defense.

That's an understandable question, and my simple answer is this:
If the cops can have them, so should the citizens.
Most people that own assault weapons do not use them on innocent people, most are probably ex-military members that find a great joy in unloading a clip in a matter of seconds miles away, or shooting a goat with a 50 cal in the Nevada deserts, (I think 50 cals are legal there).

To put it simply, it is recreation for most, but the idea of a country where citizens can arm themselves as well as any police officer keeps a balance to the powers. I firmly believe many of our crimes are the result of our poor justice system, not the absence of gun restriction! If we really want to reduce crime we need to actually punish those that commit crimes, and not slapping them on the wrist with a fine and letting them out early. That is why we have so much crime, it's not because of our guns. Those that abuse their constitutional right should pay, at the very least anybody that kills another should serve a mandatory life sentence, no parole, no getting out early for "good behavior", the sentence should be final and it should stick. If we made criminals pay for their crimes, we would have far less crime, but as it is we have morons sympathizing with criminals blaming the guns, poor education, race, anything but the actual individual who committed the crime. I think everyone can agree we are way too soft on criminals!

[yokinazu]

but as it is we have morons sympathizing with criminals blaming the guns, poor education, race, anything but the actual individual who committed the crime. I think everyone can agree we are way too soft on criminals!

dead on, couldnt have said it better myself

im sick of hearing its not my fault its society's fault. wa wa wa

[Mississippi Steve]

dead on, couldnt have said it better myself

im sick of hearing its not my fault its society's fault. wa wa wa

Guns don't kill people, husbands that come home early do

[Beefer86]

Fear of weapons is a sigh of sexual retardation- Siggy Freud.

I am an avid firearm enthusiast. As for the Virginia Tech massacre, that gun was bought legally and registered, the guy had the reciepts in his backpack.

If you want to kill a bunch of people, there are other means than guns to do so.

Last year the FBI reported that there were over 2 MILLION reported defensive uses of a firearm. Check Fbi.gov. Far more than "offensive" uses.

Israel in 2003 enacted a program in which relative and teachers would carry concealed weapons to deter Palestinian terrorists from targeting their schools after a rash of suicide explosions. Since the program was enacted, NO school children have died while in class.

Switzerland has one of the highest percentages of gun ownership, and all military aged males are required to become proficient with a battle rifle. They also have one of the lowest rates of gun deaths/accidents in the world.

In WW2 Hitler was about to invade Switzerland, but by the time the Swiss heard this, they had already armed every single household with a battle rifle, closed the mountain passes, and told Hitler "Come get us". The reason that Hitler did not invade Switzerland was because his generals convinced him of an "unacceptably high casualty rate"

Also, years after pearl harbor, an American admiral met his enemy in a casual setting postwar. The American admiral asked the Japanese admiral why they did not attack the militarily deficient west coast.

"We dare not invade the west coast of the U.S., because behind every blade of grass, is a battle rifle".

The mass amount of civilian gun ownership would surely deter most from invading us as well.

I believe that the second amendment is extremely valuable not only as a tyrannical government checker, but also as a national security protocol.

Oh yeah and then there is the fact that the police are not obligated to save you from anything.

Only you are responsible for your personal safety. If you choose to allow someone you dont know to take care of your safety for you, then that is your choice.

There are two instances in my life when I drew my firearm at low ready and am thankful for my training with it. Never had to fire.

I will continue to bear arms and be apart of that "militia" aged 17 to 41, which Hamilton defined in his federalist papers.