Should assault rifles be banned in the US?

[Cybermat47]

They should. All you need to defend yourself is a handgun. If your hand's shaking, you obviously didn't pass your gun test.

[GoldenRivet]

1. how many rounds need to be sent down range depends entirely upon who you are defending yourself against

2. I think if a person is properly trained and certified for ownership they have the right to own whatever type of firearm they want

3. nobody uses an assault rifle for home defense as it is an incredibly poor choice for close quarters shooting in a situation where the avoidance of collateral damage is obviously critical

4. I have always tried to make it a point not to participate in polls with loaded poll choices.

have a nice day everyone

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

3. nobody uses an assault rifle for home defense as it is an incredibly poor choice for close quarters shooting in a situation where the avoidance of collateral damage is obviously critical

So they're pretty much useless unless you wanted to murder some kindergarten kids.

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

have a nice day everyone

It's nighttime here
But the same to you.

[GoldenRivet]

I was unaware that the shooter used a fully automatic assault rifle.

I thought he used a bushmaster .223

Guess when you don't know what you're talking about even a muzzle loader is an assault rifle.

And no, I'd not use my assault rifles to shoot kindergarten students as you put it, my two fully automatic assault rifles have been out of the vault twice in as many years for routine cleaning. They have both been fired one full magazine once each in the last 5 years. I don't point my firearms at anything with a personality unless I want that personality to go away forever.

Personally I think this is a really inappropriate and disrespectful time to have this discussion and I don't think I'll participate beyond this post.

Good night

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Personally I think this is a really inappropriate and disrespectful time to have this discussion and I don't think I'll participate beyond this post.

Agreed

[Herr-Berbunch]

I don't think now is the right time, but it would be interesting to see the North American/European/Australasian split for this type of question.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

And no, I'd not use my assault rifles to shoot kindergarten students as you put it,

No, I wasn't suggesting that you would use them in such a way! I am really sorry, I didn't mean to offend you like that!

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

I was unaware that the shooter used a fully automatic assault rifle.

I thought he used a bushmaster .223

Guess when you don't know what you're talking about even a muzzle loader is an assault rifle.

And no, I'd not use my assault rifles to shoot kindergarten students as you put it, my two fully automatic assault rifles have been out of the vault twice in as many years for routine cleaning. They have both been fired one full magazine once each in the last 5 years. I don't point my firearms at anything with a personality unless I want that personality to go away forever.

Personally I think this is a really inappropriate and disrespectful time to have this discussion and I don't think I'll participate beyond this post.

Good night

I agree ... good night to rigged polls

True to your word Golden Rivet, you have decided to stay out of polictal motivated threads lol

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by geetrue

I agree ... good night to rigged polls

True to your word Golden Rivet, you have decided to stay out of polictal motivated threads lol

For the most part yes.

I think if you review my participation in political threads you'd see a sharp decline over the past 2 years. Additionally my participation in such threads has been considerably more... Reserved in commentary

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

So they're pretty much useless unless you wanted to murder some kindergarten kids.

I wouldn't say that is helpful to the discussion.

[CaptainMattJ.]

The .223 is roughly the same to a 5.56x45 NATO, which is used in M4 carbines and M16s. I have a .223 cartridge right in front of me, the bullet would be about as long as an average pinkie. The cartridge i have in front of me was fired from a .223 M14, known as a mini-m14 because of the fact that a military issue m14 fires 7.62x51 NATO.

The .223 may be almost identical (some say it's different, but by all that much) to a 5.56 but the .223 was originally designed to take down really big game animals. The .223 offered hunters the ability to take down an animal with less bullets and more force. Hunters are actually vital to ecosystems in some places, where population control over problem species needs to be maintained. Not to mention it's potential uses in extreme law enforcement and security for high risk events such as the olympics. It is in some cases interchangeable with the 5.56mm so it could be used with some 5.56 rifles. the .223 round is considered an assault rifle round, but banning it would cause semi automatic weapons to be affected too.

So yes, even the high powered rifles have a use in civilian hands (security firms are considered civilian in some cases). And i wholesomely believe in the right to own one. And yes, these incidents occur in the few psychotic individuals who get their hands on one, not by the millions of responsible owners around the country.

A ban on high capacity clips seems the only thing that's agreeable. that and the SERIOUS firepower, such as .50 caliber machine guns and grenades/explosives.


As for some of the real problem, it's been hit right on the head earlier in this thread. This country offers almost no support for mental issues. In fact, there are stories of people asking for help with their mentally disabled child and being told "the best case scenario is if your son/daughter/spouse gets incarcerated and put in jail". Budget cuts to mental treatment are SERIOUSLY hurting those who really need the help.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

The .223 is roughly the same to a 5.56x45 NATO, which is used in M4 carbines and M16s. I have a .223 cartridge right in front of me, the bullet would be about as long as an average pinkie. The cartridge i have in front of me was fired from a .223 M14, known as a mini-m14 because of the fact that a military issue m14 fires 7.62x51 NATO.

The .223 may be almost identical (some say it's different, but by all that much) to a 5.56 but the .223 was originally designed to take down really big game animals. The .223 offered hunters the ability to take down an animal with less bullets and more force. Hunters are actually vital to ecosystems in some places, where population control over problem species needs to be maintained. Not to mention it's potential uses in extreme law enforcement and security for high risk events such as the olympics. It is in some cases interchangeable with the 5.56mm so it could be used with some 5.56 rifles. the .223 round is considered an assault rifle round, but banning it would cause semi automatic weapons to be affected too.

Your statement about the .223 being designed to hunt large game is completely incorrect.The opposite is in fact true the .223 was designed as a varmint round so small game coyotes,wolves things of this nature you can hunt deer with one but it is not the ideal round for that role and it not a very good round for large game.Against a human being either round is highly effective and likely to cause death or very serious injury.I don't know where you got your information but it is wrong. No .223 or 5.56mm round is a long a a pinke either unless you have tiny fingers my pinkie is about 3 inches long maybe you mean the casing and the bullet.A .233 or 5.56mm is about the length of an AA battery.


Now the 5.56x45mm and the .223 are almost exactly the same in most respect they have a differences the inner wall of a 5.56mm case in thinker allowing for higher pressures the cambering is slightly different the leade of a .223 chamber will be 0.085 on a 5.56mm round the leade is 0.162 both rounds will fit in either chamber but it would be un wsie to use military grade 5.56mm rounds in a .223 chamber.

[RickC Sniper]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

The .223 may be almost identical (some say it's different, but by all that much) to a 5.56 but the .223 was originally designed to take down really big game animals. The .223 offered hunters the ability to take down an animal with less bullets and more force.

Documentation, please.

The .223 was NEVER designed to hunt very big game.

As far as hunting calibers go, the .223 is right at the marginally useful category. In many states like here in Colorado it is illegal to use a .223 Remington or a 5.56 to hunt anything except varmints. They simply don't provide an ethical kill reliably enough. The states that do allow it for deer usually have much smaller deer than here. (deer grow bigger bodies in different parts of the country)

The only reason it is popularly owned is that the semi-auto rifles in .223 available are fun to shoot and the ammo is dirt cheap compared to other center fire calibers.

(Please, no comments about the proper shot placement gets the job done yadda yadda. I have heard all those arguments) For hunting North American big game, you really should be using something else.

@Stealhead you type faster than me.

[Skybird]

Civilians buying SARs or ARs for "self-defence" do not really buy them for self-defence, but because they are either paranoid or fetishists.

To keep in check,. kill, scare to death the criminal in your home, in your train compartment, in the shop, on the streets, a pistol or revolver is perfectly sufficient. 9mm, .32, .38 - good enough if you really are just about self-defence.

If you think you need military weapons to defend yourself in your neighbourhood, then I recommend to move out of said neighbourhood, because obviously he lives in a hot warzone.

Who claims the right to own firearms of any type, even of the military type, for principal reasons of "freedom", by that logic can also claim the right to posses mines, rockets launchers, grenades. Becasue telling him he shall not own them also would limit his precious absolute and total freedom.

Firearms are no tools like any other. They are not like a knife that you can use for cutting an apple, do some work on wood - or slash a throat. A firearm is only for one purpose. It's a tool of death. I find it worrying if one is fascinated by that. One should not fear them. But one also should not like them.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I voted 'No' as protest for rigged poll. I will not waste time commenting this thread unless someone post something so ridiculous I can't resist urge.

Have a nice day/night!