"rounds that do max damage" lolno, there's been a debate about 5.56mm since the M-16 was first issued about whether or not it's powerful ENOUGH for a military use.
"And why would you need hundreds of rounds of ammo?" A day at the range.
lolno, the main cause is a culture that glorifies crime and criminals (intentionally and unintentionally) and that that doesn't provide support for people who need it.
"Anyhow, "the right to keep and bear arms" does not specify which arms." Right, it doesn't, because it's not supposed to be limited. The purpose of the 2nd amendment is national defense and protection from tyranny, that requires heavy firepower. Private citizens could own cannons in that timeframe.
You are aware that hunting rifles are far more powerful than military weapons rights? Other than snipers militaries pretty much exclusively issue weapons chambered for intermediate cartridges, which is to say intermediate between pistols and full power rifle rounds. Back in the day full-power rifles used to be issued, but that's not what we're dealing with now.
Check the energy in the "ballistic performance" box on the right side: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56mm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06
Sure. That's why it wouldn't be enforced until after the fact. If your gun is used in a crime they'll stop at your house and look at your safe. If it's broken into then you're in the clear, if it not they'll investigate. If it looks like you've been storing your guns improperly then they'll fine you based off of the level of certainty that you were improperly storing your weapons, so if they show up and your house and you have guns strewn about, no sign of a break-in and your safe is pristine and never opened you're in deep shit.
Imperfect for sure, but better than nothing and it will reduce gun crime a bit without being overly intrusive.
Sure. That's why it wouldn't be enforced until after the fact. If your gun is used in a crime they'll stop at your house and look at your safe. If it's broken into then you're in the clear, if it not they'll investigate. If it looks like you've been storing your guns improperly then they'll fine you based off of the level of certainty that you were improperly storing your weapons, so if they show up and your house and you have guns strewn about, no sign of a break-in and your safe is pristine and never opened you're in deep shit.
Imperfect for sure, but better than nothing and it will reduce gun crime a bit without being overly intrusive.
"The meaning has not been twisted, the use of the word "regulate" has changed in common speech over the years since that document was written. Today we use the term "regulate" to mean control, but that is a fairly recent, modern use of the term. The correct definition of the phrase "well regulated" as it was used during that time period, and as it can still be used today, is "well trained and supplied". Back then it did not refer to controls or limits, even though that's how we use the term today."
Do you have a citation for this? I'd love to have one on hand but I'm lazy.
Given the reality of full-auto firing it's not as bad of an idea as is widely thought. The first couple shots will be on target, all the bullets after that wil be anti-aircraft fire.
True, but then there's a TON of ex-military people floating around the country right now and a lot of them are mentally/emotionally damaged. Additionally there's plenty of sport shooters and hunters that can probably give a typical Marine a run for their money.
The AWB was made by people who knew nothing about guns except that they were scary. Their opinions on the subject should be taken with a shaker of salt.
Hunting deer with an AR would be stupid as 5.56 is only marginally good enough for humans (there's been a debate raging since it's introduction about its suitability). Most people hunting deer choose something like the.30-30 or larger, like the.30-06.
Using an AR to hunt deer would be stupid, 5.56 is only marginally powerful enough to serve against humans. Most people won't hunt deer with anything smaller than a.30-30 with.30-06 being probably the most common.
Very few people actually own and use the 100-round magazines, they're heavy and less reliable. 30 rounds mags are just about right for sport shooting, you get a good minute or two in before you have to stop and change mags. In defense situations stress makes missing quite likely and ther's plenty of people who've survived multiple non-critical hits with a 5.56 and still remained threats, if there's mutiple attackers the need for ammo is multiplied.
I have a friend who can go through hundreds in a single sitting. I've been part of competitions where it might take a couple dozen rounds to finish a single stage.
"No guns == no gun violence" Citation needed. Even countries that banned guns years ago have gun violence, not much, but it's still there. Meanwhile their general murder rates don't change much and violent crime goes up.
"allow only what it says in the constitution" Everything. The Consitution set no limits.
A single.22 won't incapacitate someone unless it's a kill shot. People get shot by MUCH more powerful weapons and remain perfectly functional to cause harm all the time.
"which is a big loop hole in many gun control laws."
Wrong. There's nothing legal to do at a swap meet or gun show that isn't legal to do outside of one. The idea of a "Gun show loophole" is a flat out lie that's been told so often it's accepted as truth.
To be clear the requirement of an FFL to transfer weapons even between individuals is something I would consider perfectly reasonable, but the talk of loopholes is totally wrong.
They still have them and they are still accessible to the owner. Most of the spree shooters are using weapons they own (Kip Kinkel's parents bought him the guns) or weapons that were stolen from friends or family members, guns stolen in straight up robberies are rarely used. There's nothing stopping a Swiss person from taking their own gun and using it, and it's hardly a stretch to say that a child could see the code their parent punched into the safe or find the place they stash the key and use the gun.
They don't because the Swiss are better people than we ware here, but they could.
Slashdot Mirror
"automatic rifle"
No.
"rounds that do max damage"
lolno, there's been a debate about 5.56mm since the M-16 was first issued about whether or not it's powerful ENOUGH for a military use.
"And why would you need hundreds of rounds of ammo?"
A day at the range.
"the main cause of these recurring massacres."
lolno, the main cause is a culture that glorifies crime and criminals (intentionally and unintentionally) and that that doesn't provide support for people who need it.
"Anyhow, "the right to keep and bear arms" does not specify which arms."
Right, it doesn't, because it's not supposed to be limited. The purpose of the 2nd amendment is national defense and protection from tyranny, that requires heavy firepower. Private citizens could own cannons in that timeframe.
You are aware that hunting rifles are far more powerful than military weapons rights? Other than snipers militaries pretty much exclusively issue weapons chambered for intermediate cartridges, which is to say intermediate between pistols and full power rifle rounds. Back in the day full-power rifles used to be issued, but that's not what we're dealing with now.
Check the energy in the "ballistic performance" box on the right side:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56mm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.30-06
Reposting from above:
Sure. That's why it wouldn't be enforced until after the fact. If your gun is used in a crime they'll stop at your house and look at your safe. If it's broken into then you're in the clear, if it not they'll investigate. If it looks like you've been storing your guns improperly then they'll fine you based off of the level of certainty that you were improperly storing your weapons, so if they show up and your house and you have guns strewn about, no sign of a break-in and your safe is pristine and never opened you're in deep shit.
Imperfect for sure, but better than nothing and it will reduce gun crime a bit without being overly intrusive.
Sure. That's why it wouldn't be enforced until after the fact. If your gun is used in a crime they'll stop at your house and look at your safe. If it's broken into then you're in the clear, if it not they'll investigate. If it looks like you've been storing your guns improperly then they'll fine you based off of the level of certainty that you were improperly storing your weapons, so if they show up and your house and you have guns strewn about, no sign of a break-in and your safe is pristine and never opened you're in deep shit.
Imperfect for sure, but better than nothing and it will reduce gun crime a bit without being overly intrusive.
"The meaning has not been twisted, the use of the word "regulate" has changed in common speech over the years since that document was written. Today we use the term "regulate" to mean control, but that is a fairly recent, modern use of the term. The correct definition of the phrase "well regulated" as it was used during that time period, and as it can still be used today, is "well trained and supplied". Back then it did not refer to controls or limits, even though that's how we use the term today."
Do you have a citation for this? I'd love to have one on hand but I'm lazy.
Given the reality of full-auto firing it's not as bad of an idea as is widely thought. The first couple shots will be on target, all the bullets after that wil be anti-aircraft fire.
True, but then there's a TON of ex-military people floating around the country right now and a lot of them are mentally/emotionally damaged. Additionally there's plenty of sport shooters and hunters that can probably give a typical Marine a run for their money.
The AWB was made by people who knew nothing about guns except that they were scary. Their opinions on the subject should be taken with a shaker of salt.
Hunting deer with an AR would be stupid as 5.56 is only marginally good enough for humans (there's been a debate raging since it's introduction about its suitability). Most people hunting deer choose something like the .30-30 or larger, like the .30-06.
Using an AR to hunt deer would be stupid, 5.56 is only marginally powerful enough to serve against humans. Most people won't hunt deer with anything smaller than a .30-30 with .30-06 being probably the most common.
It lacks selective-fire capability, which is required by defnintion to be an assault rifle.
Very few people actually own and use the 100-round magazines, they're heavy and less reliable. 30 rounds mags are just about right for sport shooting, you get a good minute or two in before you have to stop and change mags. In defense situations stress makes missing quite likely and ther's plenty of people who've survived multiple non-critical hits with a 5.56 and still remained threats, if there's mutiple attackers the need for ammo is multiplied.
I have a friend who can go through hundreds in a single sitting. I've been part of competitions where it might take a couple dozen rounds to finish a single stage.
"No guns == no gun violence"
Citation needed. Even countries that banned guns years ago have gun violence, not much, but it's still there. Meanwhile their general murder rates don't change much and violent crime goes up.
"allow only what it says in the constitution"
Everything. The Consitution set no limits.
Not really, then you're left with the physically powerful who have the ability to do as they will since they have the most powerful weapons.
This is the reason my mom gives for not wanting to fly.
"I prefer non-lethal weapons because I want the fucker to suffer and hopefully end up crippled."
And then sue you for pain and suffering. Don't think it won't happen.
A single .22 won't incapacitate someone unless it's a kill shot. People get shot by MUCH more powerful weapons and remain perfectly functional to cause harm all the time.
I wonder how many more people could have died at the North Hollywood Shootout if they HADN'T modified their AKs to full auto.
You have to pass a background check first.
"which is a big loop hole in many gun control laws."
Wrong. There's nothing legal to do at a swap meet or gun show that isn't legal to do outside of one. The idea of a "Gun show loophole" is a flat out lie that's been told so often it's accepted as truth.
To be clear the requirement of an FFL to transfer weapons even between individuals is something I would consider perfectly reasonable, but the talk of loopholes is totally wrong.
I think you managed to collect all of the incorrect opinions on effective gun control into one post. Bravo.
I wonder how many had those mental conditions BEFORE going to prison...
They still have them and they are still accessible to the owner. Most of the spree shooters are using weapons they own (Kip Kinkel's parents bought him the guns) or weapons that were stolen from friends or family members, guns stolen in straight up robberies are rarely used. There's nothing stopping a Swiss person from taking their own gun and using it, and it's hardly a stretch to say that a child could see the code their parent punched into the safe or find the place they stash the key and use the gun.
They don't because the Swiss are better people than we ware here, but they could.