Assault rifles for self defense

actually i am mandated by law to have car insurance because i own a car. i am also mandated by law to wear a seatbelt or i am given a ticket. home owners insurance is mandated by my mortgage company. any other questions?

are you mandated by law to have a psychological profile if you want to purchase a gun? are you mandated by law to take a firearms safety course prior to purchasing a gun?

you keep using the 2 million number of people individuals who have stopped crimes? where are you getting this? this would mean approx. 5,479 crimes a day are prevented by civilians carry guns.

Are you mandated a psychological profile to exercise your first amendment rights, rights can only be taken when they are misused. Do you have to take a power tools safety course, no it your responsibility to learn how to safely operate them. I posted a link to a site that claims 2.5 million civilian uses of firearms earlier in the thread, I've been aware of the 2 million for several years, there are many sources for it. People like me don't own and carry guns to feel safe, we have them because we know shit happens and like insurance and seat belts they can help you survive the worse case. We know the worse case will happen, and only insane people fail to prepare, because it doesn't always happen to the other guy.
rights have already been established to not be absolute. why does the right thing the 2nd amendment needs to be absolute?

Here we have indication of another hypocrite. Tell me something, what reasonable limitations do you think we need on abortion? Would you support a three day cooling off period for abortions? Should be ban abortions if they look like military style abortions? How about a criminal background check and psychological screening?

Don't talk to me about limits on my rights unless you are willing to limit the rights that you think are important.
 
Look...a normal pump shotgun works just fine here in rural Florida for stopping a maurauding 200 pound wild boar. No one needs to drag out an AR-15 for instant pulled pork.

There is no need for shredded human flesh from assault rifles, either.

Regards from Rosie

Rosie; you're a leftist - ergo stupid.

Still, which do you think would "shred" more, a 12 gauge with 15 pellets or a .223 with a single 22 cal slug?

Fucking leftists - can't understand normal thought.
 
So based on the CHANCE of someone using a weapon for criminal activites, I have to lose my right to own said weapon, even with no prior bad acts and no current indication of any potential malicous activities?

So I guess because I MAY use fighting words on someone, I have to be gagged and prevented from speaking entirely.
again, no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but it has been shown already that certain weapons in the hands of the public do not serve a public good. these include assault weapons and high capacity magazines. no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but if you are a real hunter, there a number of weapons available that are not assault weapons that have very high rankings.

50 Best Hunting Rifles of the Past 10 Years -- Photo 18 | Outdoor Life

What's wrong with these hunting rifles?

20 Versatile Semi-Automatic Rifles -- Photo 8 | Outdoor Life

OMG, it has a pistol grip, ban it.
 
Again, assault is intent. the mililtary makes weapons for that intent. Those weapons have selectors. They are not sold on the civilian markets. An AR-15 is not an assault rifle. However, any firearm can be used for the intent of assault.

You're going to have to come with something better or stop using that term to distinguish civilian firearms...unless you're using it to distinguish the difference between military grade weapons and civilian grade.

Otherwise, it's simply motive/intent.
again, if you dont like the standard definition there is no one who cant help you out there. the definition is what it is. your argument against semantics is irrelevant.

So then you agree that any firearm taken up for the purposes of assault, is an assault weapon? SO all guns should be banned? Or are you going off the federal governments bureaucracy version of what "assault weapon" means. Which is hilariously erroneous,
 
again, no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but it has been shown already that certain weapons in the hands of the public do not serve a public good. these include assault weapons and high capacity magazines. no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but if you are a real hunter, there a number of weapons available that are not assault weapons that have very high rankings.

50 Best Hunting Rifles of the Past 10 Years -- Photo 18 | Outdoor Life

What's wrong with these hunting rifles?

20 Versatile Semi-Automatic Rifles -- Photo 8 | Outdoor Life

OMG, it has a pistol grip, ban it.

Collapsible butt stock? Ban it.
 
Apples and oranges. You can kill anyone with anything.

Semi-automatics serve ONE purpose: to kill lots of people easily in a short amount of time.

So, you're only concern is when it is a mass killing? What is your breaking point there? 3, 5, 10? You aren't concerned about an even larger number of total deaths by say a drunk driver since they happen one or two dead people at a time? Noted.

The primary or sole purpose of a car is not to kill. The primary or sole purpose of a baseball bat is not to kill. These objects serve a purpose to society other than killing.

Yet they do kill......and at a rate greater than an "assault" rifle. They should be banned for safety's sake.
 
actually i am mandated by law to have car insurance because i own a car. i am also mandated by law to wear a seatbelt or i am given a ticket. home owners insurance is mandated by my mortgage company. any other questions?

are you mandated by law to have a psychological profile if you want to purchase a gun? are you mandated by law to take a firearms safety course prior to purchasing a gun?

you keep using the 2 million number of people individuals who have stopped crimes? where are you getting this? this would mean approx. 5,479 crimes a day are prevented by civilians carry guns.

Are you mandated a psychological profile to exercise your first amendment rights, rights can only be taken when they are misused. Do you have to take a power tools safety course, no it your responsibility to learn how to safely operate them. I posted a link to a site that claims 2.5 million civilian uses of firearms earlier in the thread, I've been aware of the 2 million for several years, there are many sources for it. People like me don't own and carry guns to feel safe, we have them because we know shit happens and like insurance and seat belts they can help you survive the worse case. We know the worse case will happen, and only insane people fail to prepare, because it doesn't always happen to the other guy.
rights have already been established to not be absolute. why does the right thing the 2nd amendment needs to be absolute?

Try educating yourself on the intent of that amendment, the people are intended to have weapons capable of overthrowing a tyrannical government, are we there yet, no, but like I said you have to prepare for the worse case and giving up the power to defend your self is an invitation for the worse case. Just look at the hundreds of millions throughout history that allowed themselves to be disarmed and died as a result. It never works out well for the people. So yes the second amendment is absolute. There was a video posted last night, you might want to take some time and watch it, you might learn the need for the second amendment.
 
again, no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but it has been shown already that certain weapons in the hands of the public do not serve a public good. these include assault weapons and high capacity magazines. no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but if you are a real hunter, there a number of weapons available that are not assault weapons that have very high rankings.

50 Best Hunting Rifles of the Past 10 Years -- Photo 18 | Outdoor Life

I've got a very simple question, how many rounds should a citizen be restricted to, in a self defense situation?
question back to you, how round does a citizen need in a single weapon to protect themselves? revolvers only hold 6 rounds, at one time that was enough. there is no law, nor any talk of legislation limiting the number of weapons, or the number of clips one may carry. so if your restricted to 10 rounds per clip, why not carry 3 clips, or 3 weapons. yet the right never talks about this.

if it take you a specific number of rounds in a weapon simply to feel safe, then no number of rounds will ever make you feel safe.

What's the difference between 3 ten round clips or one 30 round clip? If someone can carry thirty rounds in 3 ten round magazines, why can't they just use thirty rounds in 1 thirty round magazine?
 
actually the gun community refers to them as assault rifles as well.

Bullshit.

Anyone not retarded understands that an assault rifle is either select fire or full auto.

assault rifles plural of as·sault ri·fle
Noun
A rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

I semi-auto cannot be an assault rifle - regardless of what some over-privileged old twat in San Francisco declares.
 
So, you're only concern is when it is a mass killing? What is your breaking point there? 3, 5, 10? You aren't concerned about an even larger number of total deaths by say a drunk driver since they happen one or two dead people at a time? Noted.

The primary or sole purpose of a car is not to kill. The primary or sole purpose of a baseball bat is not to kill. These objects serve a purpose to society other than killing.

Yet they do kill......and at a rate greater than an "assault" rifle. They should be banned for safety's sake.
yet you still need a license to operate a car. can the same be said about a gun?
 
based on the 1994 definition of assault weapons, it leaves several different types of rifles, hand guns and shot guns left for the avid hunter, marksman or recreational shooter to own and operate. all of which are more than adequate to be used to protect a family.

id like to know a specific reason why gun advocates believe that only high powered assault rifles are sufficient for protection?

Which of these is an "Assault Rifle?"

31VQ9itT7XL._SS420_.jpg


images
 
Last edited:
again, no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but it has been shown already that certain weapons in the hands of the public do not serve a public good. these include assault weapons and high capacity magazines. no one is talking about complete gun elimination, but if you are a real hunter, there a number of weapons available that are not assault weapons that have very high rankings.

50 Best Hunting Rifles of the Past 10 Years -- Photo 18 | Outdoor Life

What's wrong with these hunting rifles?

20 Versatile Semi-Automatic Rifles -- Photo 8 | Outdoor Life

OMG, it has a pistol grip, ban it.

LOL, that pretty much sums up the mindset of some people.
 
actually the gun community refers to them as assault rifles as well.

Bullshit.

Anyone not retarded understands that an assault rifle is either select fire or full auto.

assault rifles plural of as·sault ri·fle
Noun
A rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

I semi-auto cannot be an assault rifle - regardless of what some over-privileged old twat in San Francisco declares.

In civilian criminal law. Assault is an intent. So all weapons can be assault weapons. A bat, a golf club, an AR-15, etc..
 
In civilian criminal law. Assault is an intent. So all weapons can be assault weapons. A bat, a golf club, an AR-15, etc..

I understand, but in military parlance, an "assault rifle" is an easily portable, fully automatic weapon. The BAR, Thomson .30, M-14, M-16 and the infamous AK47. No semi-auto is EVER classified as an "assault rifle," it's patently absurd.
 
based on the 1994 definition of assault weapons, it leaves several different types of rifles, hand guns and shot guns left for the avid hunter, marksman or recreational shooter to own and operate. all of which are more than adequate to be used to protect a family.

id like to know a specific reason why gun advocates believe that only high powered assault rifles are sufficient for protection?

Which of these is an "Assault Rifle?"

31VQ9itT7XL._SS420_.jpg


images
by the 1994 definition the first weapon is in fact is an assault weapon as it has the following:

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i can not tell if the second is, as the picture is quite poor to allow for analysis.
 
Last edited:
Which of these is an "Assault Rifle?"

31VQ9itT7XL._SS420_.jpg


images
by the 1994 definition that is in fact is an assault weapon as it has the following:

Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip

Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So the top one then? Which in fact is a BB gun, rather than the bottom one which is in fact a fully automatic M-14?
so due to your piss poor photos, we are supposed to just believe you?

which one of these is an assault weapon?

41ysmBGVvEL._SS500_.jpg


293486_43d792021454704be6489ce7b828c77b.png_256


i can play that game too.
 

Forum List

Back
Top