Assualt Weapons What are they good for?

[accessbob]

Those big bad "assault weapons" are good protection. I want to be able to have the ability in the case of a large natural disaster or civil uprising to be able to protect my home and family from more than a couple of people. We have a gang problem and do you really think that all of them are just going to become nice and accomodating or could they, since they've already bonded, take from those who have none, or limited, defenses? They sure can. I want to at least stand a chance. But banning those are not going to stop the criminal element from having them so it will just make it harder to be able to defend myself and my family. It still irritates me that a handful of people do something bad and 80 million of us have to suffer for it. And then they'll just create new "gun free zones" and that will stop nothing. But they want to FEEL like they are doing something when the real fix would be hard work and costly (both to freedoms and to the budget). I'm hoping that sanity will prevail but I'm skeptical that it will. It's so frustrating.

 

[chariot13]

Long gone are the days where the civilians can own what our military owns - if nothing else the cost is prohibative. I can think of many things i would rather do that to take on anthing armored with even a 50 caliber rifle. As civiialsn we dont have combat jets, helicopters and what not. DO any of you really think you could take on the military and win. We might have a few wins but overall the technology and might of the military would win. We have one thing on our side and that is the beleif that most of the men and women in our military have close ties to the civiiians of this country and would not kill thier own. History has shown that it could go either way but I would like to think this is our saving grace as civilians. SO when we start assuming that the right to own these firearms is going to be up to the job of possibly over throwing our tyrants then I just laugh and think what fools. This is my opinion.

James Ruby

Thats very true. I don't think any civilian population could defeat our military, including our own if they were determined to wipe out all resistance no matter how righteous of a cause the civilians had. However I think there would be many defectors & along with military defectors, comes military equipment & know how. Besides would you rather continue to live & maybe die with the Freedom you have & always should have. Or die from old age without any of the Freedom you once had?

 

[DuneHopper]

To those that answered logically thanks I got my answers.

To the others who sniffed to much Gun powder when they were younger and you can you not read a simple question. And to the ones that answered a question with a question after asked not to.
I also thank you too cause now know what a Liberal Conservative is, they are they only ones that never answer a question and only respond with a question.


Thanks again, seems the normal people many people have them just because they see it as any other weapon and not what society makes one out to be. The other people I will never know because they can not read, and for the record I ask a question and never claimed any facts I was asking because I was unsure AH's !

 

[just dan]

i remember when full autos were somewhat common. i had a couple, friends had 'em, etc.
i don't remember mine or those that i knew of being used in any nefarious activities.
i don't remember mine or those that i knew of assaulting anyone.
i do remember how much fun they were to shoot.
i do remember how expensive they were to shoot.
i registered mine... later legally sold them at a huge, obscene profit. wish i'd kept one of them... worth even more now.

now i sit here wondering of my semi auto hunting rifles are one day going to be near unobtainium...

and i sit here wondering why, just why anyone that would consider themselves a gun person... gun enthusiast... pro 2A... would use the term "assault rifle" in description of something that is clearly not a selective fire weapon (which is, as far as i know, the only definition) when that term has become so over abused by the media, dems/liberals and nearly everyone who's so against and afraid of firearms that they seek to ban them from existence.

yes- i know "assault weapon" was used here... assault weapon now apparently equates to assault rifle...
i'm going to go fire up my assault coffee pot now.

 

[badclam]

Long gone are the days where the civilians can own what our military owns - if nothing else the cost is prohibative. I can think of many things i would rather do that to take on anthing armored with even a 50 caliber rifle. As civiialsn we dont have combat jets, helicopters and what not. DO any of you really think you could take on the military and win. We might have a few wins but overall the technology and might of the military would win. We have one thing on our side and that is the beleif that most of the men and women in our military have close ties to the civiiians of this country and would not kill thier own. History has shown that it could go either way but I would like to think this is our saving grace as civilians. SO when we start assuming that the right to own these firearms is going to be up to the job of possibly over throwing our tyrants then I just laugh and think what fools. This is my opinion.

James Ruby

Have you seen what the Taliban has done to our government in Iraq and Afghanistan? They don't have any airplanes or tanks, but have managed to create nightmares for our government with small arms and improvised devices. They do it by looking like, and hiding amongst civilians. I think they are the best example of why your theory doesn't hold water.

Let us not forget that we live in a country that has the most deadly military on the planet. So our government already understands that superior firepower is a huge advantage in deterring those that would infringe upon our rights and freedoms. They just would prefer that we, civilians, don't have that same kind of deterant.

 

[Vantage]

This right here. Wasn't there a time when full-auto firearms were evil? Now those are restricted.
Now it's semi-auto firearms that are evil.

They call 30 round mags high capacity. I call it standard capacity. They want to make 10 rounders standard. If that happens, there will be a mentally ill person that will go out and use the 10 rounders to kill lots of people. Then guess what? 10 rounders will be on the ban list. 5 rounders will be the standard.....because hunters are only allowed to hunt with 5 round mags so it must be OK They are already using that reasoning.

(insert sarcasm)

but it's unethical to take down a deer with 5 shots. You should only need one. Maybe a second shot to put it out of its misery, but you can easily take the time to reload a single-shot rifle for that. So.... no need for those evil 5 shot capacity rifles.

And forget revolvers. They're just as evil as semi autos!! One bullet per pull of the trigger right?! Still capable of delivering a high volume of rounds in under a minute. Those have got to go as well.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

With "friends" like the OP who needs enemies?

 

[Vantage]

i'm going to go fire up my assault coffee pot now.

I used my assault staple gun to put up my chistmas lights.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

But they are , have been and I foresee well into the future that they will be controlled regardless of wether you, I or anyone else likes it. They are simply not asking us for our opinion.

James Ruby

Tyrants never do. Nor should patriots ask permission to post a revolution

 

[mouse]

Tyrannical government, foreign and domestic. Given the times, I fear the latter.

 

[davemata]

With "friends" like the OP who needs enemies?

I agree with this. The OP's question basically is promoting the beliefs of the antis, directly. He's asking himself, if I don't have it, why does anyone need it?

It's gun NIMBYism, and it's straight horrible.

 

[accessbob]

I'll bet that someone with a Mosin/Nagant (5 shot magazine, bolt action) would have little trouble causing some major damage. So they take away rapid fire weapons (which by their nature it works better to slowly fire in order to acquire a target), they'll end up making the people like the shooters into snipers. Just what we need. Repeats of the University of Texas 1968 shootings. I am so frustrated that they equate the tool with fixing the problem. It is not the tool, it is the "tool" himself (mentally unstable, or just plain evil) that is the problem. But they just don't see it. Even my kids get it. Sheesh.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

As far as defeating the vaunted US military, it seems the Afghans have, wearing rags, living on goats meat and milk, and carrying obsolete weapons. Maybe they are more courageous than soft Americans?

They also defeated the Russians. You sheeple...keep repeating

Resistence is useless

And BTW military small arms should not cost more than their "civvy" counterparts, if we followed the Constitution

 

[clearconscience]

Has anyone posted or read about the rash of school assaults in china? On the day of the CT shooting there were 22 kids injured in a knife attack from a villager. so in china have they produced a new kind of "assault knife" i bet it's painted black. And it probably has a blade shroud. That shoulder thing that goes up?!

It's a ridiculous argument that we should ban a tool to prevent a mentally unstable person from hurting others. People will always find a way to hurt others.

I have said it before and i will say it till i die. The only way i'm giving up my handguns, "assault" rifles, knives, or "tactical" flashlights is if they remove them from the hands of the politicians and the uber wealthy. Take away guns from politicians and take away their tax payer funded secret service and i will be first in line to hand over my guns.
That will never happen, so i will never give up my guns.

The power should always lay in the hands of the people and not only in the hands of the rich and political.

When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm not handing my guns over, ever, no matter what they do

To apply logic to your exact conditions.. they disarm, you give up your guns and can't get more, and then they just rearm and laugh at you

 

[40calruler]

I do not own a high capacity rifle such as a AR/AK but the way I read and have learned in school about the second amendment is it is there to allow the common man the ability to protect themselves against a government that becomes out of control as the idea of the "free" country is that we are free to make up our mind on what we own, do, the beliefs we have. Take away the high capacity rifle and then goes my 17 round mag in my 9mm. So who is left with the powerful means to defend themselves. Criminals and the government. Dictation at its finest. Our forefathers put that second ammendment in there to give us the same ability to defend ourselves against any threat..foreign or domestic. Take away the right to carry and use the same or close to the same weopons as people who might harm our familys or neighbors and you take away the whole idea of what we stand for.
Yes there are bad eggs out there but do you really think that a 8 round shotgun is going to be less of a threat in a crowded area than an AR. No it will not be but if that is the best fire power we are "allowed" what happens if the day comes when we do need to defend against those people with High capacity firearms that shoot accurately 500 yards or better. We hide...That is not the America that was meant to be. The second ammendment is there so that given that situation we damn well shoot back and bann together as a country. America is not a governement. It is a country full of citizens who are supposed to be able to feel safe however they feel they need to make themselves safe. I for one will not be standing with a 6 round pistol while being occupied by many people with assault rifles. You see it on bumper stickers and all kinds of places PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE, NOT GUNS. If my neighbor wants a 75 round drum on his or her rifle then so be it. That is their right to have if it makes them feel safe or even if the just like the way the damn thing looks.

 

[trainsktg]

The best reason to have one is to defend yourself against the tyrannical government that the second amendment was put in place to defend against. Essentially, the citizens need access to the same or similar weapons that the government has, so that we are free to defend ourselves from them should the need arise.

Oh, but that would nevvverrr happen in today's world...

Keith

 

[HuckFin]

The germans stg 44 was the first fully automatic weapon,that was called a assault rifle.. stg(sturmgewehr) is german for storm/assault rifle. The liberals in the early 90s started calling semi auto military guns "assault guns" Check out Wikipedia for stg 44. Also I heard that "assault guns" are illigal in Conneticut?

 

[Member 3687]

What is an Assault weapon many here have asked and answered but I have to add two more.

Is a Ryder truck an assault weapon? Most would think not yet one was used by the Oklahoma bomber and if I remember right the Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, 19 children under the age of 6, and injured more than 680 people without a shot being fired.

How about an air plane? We saw how they were used during the 911 Twin Towers attack where almost 3000 died.

Go back to the 70’s where bombings where common between the IRA and the British or to today in Afghanistan or Iraq where IED’s are common place if these nut jobs figure what damage these could do firearms will be the least of their problems...

As far as if civilians could beat the military again look at Afghanistan they kicked the Russians’ butts and in reality we are not really winning, more or less just holding our own. So could we do it, the answer is yes, we know the turf and when it is your home you fight harder?

Now to why I have an AK and a FAL I hunt with them, protect my family with them and train with them. When I had the AR platform I hunted with them as well. In the early 80s when I lived in Washington State I built a 6MM/223 to hunt with as they had a 6MM minimum caliber restriction. I also had to modify a magazine to only accept 5 rounds to meet state hunting requirements as none where to be found.

So tell me why did all the cops, ATF and the FBI that showed up after the fact needed all their assault weapons at the school. It was to protect themselves and others if there was more than one bad guy the same reason I need mine. Because if you did not notice the cops did not show up until after it was over so it is up to me to protect myself until help can arrive. This is not a dig on cops but until the bad guy commits a crime their hands are tied and from what I hear the whole thing was over in 15 minutes or less, before the cops even had time to truly figure out what was going on.

 

[coop44]

1 cranky ol' bastard with a bolt action= assault weapon

so I guess it all depends on what definition you have been fed.