Gun Control thread (merged many)

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

i've found this to be untrue in too many circumstance, especially recently.

In my opinion, there is no reason to own a military-grade assault rifle (and that means a rifle firing rifle rounds with selective fire and high capacity magazines).

Close enough to pass as being correct. Though I would maintain that the magazine capacity is irrelevant when talking about Assault Rifles. Though i do wonder what you consider "high capacity" verses what you would consider a "normal capacity" magazine.

I have yet to see a single completely logical argument that would justify owning an assault rifle.

I didn't realize anyone was actually arguing for the possession real assault rifles. I know I never have. However people are arguing about rifles based on the civilian version of Armalite Rifle No. 15. Regarding that, I found a

That being said, the assault rifle is already a helluva thing to own for most people, therefore most people do not own assault rifles, making it a non-issue.

Also correct. Assault rifles don't grow on trees. You just can't go down to your local gunshop and buy one. They are rare, and incredibly expensive.

If any legislation should be passed, it should be higher licensing standards, especially mandatory psychiatric evaluation, but again its already extremely difficult to legally own an assault rifle, making banning it outright a poor way of doing things.

Yeah, you have to jump through hoops to get a class 3 as it is already. Fingerprints, mug shots, the whole ball of wax.

This half-assed undereducated mess of a bill is not going to solve anything.

When was the last time an assault rifle was used in a shooting anyway? Off the top of my head, I think that was the north Hollywood shootout. Interestingly, the 1994 assault weapons ban was in effect at the time. Clearly it was working wonders.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

That's the whole point of the Bill Of Rights. You don't have to justify owning anything. The government has to justify taking it away from you. The British governor of Massachussetts didn't see any justification in common citizens owning cannons either, so he sent troops to confiscate them. That's what Lexington and Concorde were about.

Yes sir, it is called the Bill of Rights. Not the "bill of needs". I find myself rather tired of politicians wiping their asses with it.