Are semi-automatic weapons for personal defense?
#11
01-29-2013, 01:43 PM
Being a part of the gov't I have mixed feelings about it. But my overall standpoint is, if criminals break the law and you make certain guns illegal, then you're empowering criminals with the ability to know that all law abiding citizens are now at a disadvantage for protecting themselves.
Now far stretch here I know, but I would like to see us go back to old west days where everyone was allowed and encouraged to open carry. I highly doubt there'd be any mass murders or killing sprees that would last longer than a couple seconds, if everyone had a weapon and everyone else knew it. A criminal is much less likely to try to rob/carjack/rape/accost someone with a pistol holstered on their hip.
Now far stretch here I know, but I would like to see us go back to old west days where everyone was allowed and encouraged to open carry. I highly doubt there'd be any mass murders or killing sprees that would last longer than a couple seconds, if everyone had a weapon and everyone else knew it. A criminal is much less likely to try to rob/carjack/rape/accost someone with a pistol holstered on their hip.
They have awesome gun laws...and the Death Penalty!
Maybe thats what every state needs reinacted?
Eye for an eye! That should change some of the criminals actions/Intent.
But hey thats just me!
#12
01-29-2013, 01:51 PM
Monte Of The Month -- February 2008
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Born in East LA
Posts: 4,286
One has to be aware of all the issues surrounding ownership of semi-automatic rifles. Some officials in the government as well as some people of the public sector have split feelings over who whould be able to own what type of weapon. Notice how many sheriff departments across the country have come out saying they will not enforce any new gun laws that require people to turn in thier weapons or high capacity magazines. Then you have those including the govt. who say the average american citizen has no need to possess a semi-automatic rifle especially the ominous appearing black military appearing ones.
It is argued we have no need for one as what have we to fear and all we need is a 5 rd shotgun for personal defense. Then interestingly enough the DHS has put out an order for 7,000 rifles capable of selective fire to include full auto. And right there in their solicitation proposal as for the purpose of the weapons they state they are for PERSONAL DEFENSE. So why is it they are able to claim they need them for personal defense and when we make the same claim we are labeled as some wacko type survivalist. I sense a disarming of the average american citizen. What a wild world we now live in.
See excerpt from article below and a link to the actual bid request.
The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components.
The action shall be select-fire (capable of semi-automatic and automatic fire).
Link to article: See article IN section C (PDW) and enlarge the 1st paragraph.
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&m...=core&_cview=0
It is argued we have no need for one as what have we to fear and all we need is a 5 rd shotgun for personal defense. Then interestingly enough the DHS has put out an order for 7,000 rifles capable of selective fire to include full auto. And right there in their solicitation proposal as for the purpose of the weapons they state they are for PERSONAL DEFENSE. So why is it they are able to claim they need them for personal defense and when we make the same claim we are labeled as some wacko type survivalist. I sense a disarming of the average american citizen. What a wild world we now live in.
See excerpt from article below and a link to the actual bid request.
The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components.
The action shall be select-fire (capable of semi-automatic and automatic fire).
Link to article: See article IN section C (PDW) and enlarge the 1st paragraph.
https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&m...=core&_cview=0
So when the libs in gov call these guns military style weapons, they are both right and wrong.
They look like military weapons, they in no way perform like military weapons.
#13
01-29-2013, 01:52 PM
And as for the whole, assault rifle/hunting issue. Most people who aren't firearms knowledgeable like to place labels like "assault rifle". I hate it personally, there's been dumb articles in the news I've seen, calling the front sling swivel on an AR a bayonet lug/grenade launcher attachment point. Now that's just ignorance at it's finest. Funny thing is I can take my Mini 14 Ranch Rifle which looks just like this:
And 99% of none the wiser people will call that a hunting rifle. When asked if it is an assault rifle or a hunting rifle.
Now if I just change the stock on it, which doesn't change any sort of performance capability of the rifle, doesn't change the muzzle velocity, the firing rate, or loading capabilities at all and ask them that same question, those same 99% will call it an assault rifle just because it looks different, for example:
And 99% of none the wiser people will call that a hunting rifle. When asked if it is an assault rifle or a hunting rifle.
Now if I just change the stock on it, which doesn't change any sort of performance capability of the rifle, doesn't change the muzzle velocity, the firing rate, or loading capabilities at all and ask them that same question, those same 99% will call it an assault rifle just because it looks different, for example:
#14
01-29-2013, 01:58 PM
In reference to your earlier post about encouraging open carry/ownership of guns. I'm at school right now in a city called Kennesaw. Kennesaw is known for its '84 law that every head of house must own a gun. Take a guess at what the crime rate around here is.
I wouldn't mind a similar national law lol.
#15
01-29-2013, 02:20 PM
Criminals are gonna get their guns either way it goes. I don't see a need for Americans, law abiding Americans to have HIGH CALIBER guns, but taking them away, in this manner won't do anything. I don't think it should be passed, there are other areas then guns to worry about, "good citizens" have commuted crimes with guns before, heck, the church down the street from my house, just got robbed a few days ago. I mean really, a church??
#16
01-29-2013, 02:54 PM
People have just gone crazy in general I think. I don't see how any banning of any gun will help. It would be like banning people from having cars because people get killed by cars. Its stupid talk. Just something for the government to talk about because apparently solving the debt isn't a big enough issue.
#17
01-29-2013, 03:31 PM
I am of the opinion that banning weapons is not the answer here. Have you seen the ads on any online site where anyone can buy a gun with no background check? Doesn't even take into account gunshows, where until recently I believe, there was no background check run to purchase. Enforce the laws we have now in regard to background checks and LEGAL sales, and it takes some of the criminal element out of the equation. I think attempting to ban certain items hoping it will curtail crime is a pipe dream. Criminals will always be able to find a way to get a gun as long as guns are part of our society. But even taking them out all together is not the answer either in my opinion. My wife and I own guns, and are trained to use them. My 8 and 6 year old boys are in the beginning stages of learning about them, and I personally will never relenquish mine. I am going to need them when the zombies attack. But that's another story.........
#18
01-29-2013, 07:12 PM
Can't spell PIMP without an MP
Monte Of The Month -- November 2010
2010 Monte Of The Year
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Grove City, Ohio
Posts: 2,626
I have VERY strong opinions on the recent debates surrounding the American 2nd Amendment. The people that I'm friends with on FB can attest to this fact. I am surprised/pleased that a civil discussion is taking place on the matter without extremist opinions on either side. Thank you. It seems that we can't have a discussion on car audio without name calling. Kudos to you...
#19
01-30-2013, 12:07 PM
Monte Of The Month -- February 2008
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Born in East LA
Posts: 4,286
My all time favorite anti quote, trying to describe a barrel shroud as: "that shoulder thing that goes up." - Rep Carolyn McCarthy
In reference to your earlier post about encouraging open carry/ownership of guns. I'm at school right now in a city called Kennesaw. Kennesaw is known for its '84 law that every head of house must own a gun. Take a guess at what the crime rate around here is.
I wouldn't mind a similar national law lol.
In reference to your earlier post about encouraging open carry/ownership of guns. I'm at school right now in a city called Kennesaw. Kennesaw is known for its '84 law that every head of house must own a gun. Take a guess at what the crime rate around here is.
I wouldn't mind a similar national law lol.
Isn't it Switzerland where every 18+ male has to purchase and own an automatic weapon? I know they don't have an army, but I believe they have one of the lowest murder rates by gun in the world.
#20
01-30-2013, 06:07 PM
I don't want anyone to take away my guns, you can bet they won't if they ever decide to.
I think this whole gun ban thing might be a distraction for something else the gov' might be doing?? Hmmm.
I think this whole gun ban thing might be a distraction for something else the gov' might be doing?? Hmmm.