Before this conversation starts to get out of hand on an uninformed/uneducated tangent, I'd like to repost a post from a member on another site that I frequent. If I were to take the time to sit down and write a reply about firearms/weapons and what I believe is the problem with the uninformed/uneducated attitude in this country about the subject, I would say this:
And I quote:
"It’s hard to have an honest discussion about arms when there is so much disinformation, misinformation and out right lies coupled with something that generates such strong emotions.
For example; recently a well know TV personality (I don’t want to give him any more publicity, so I’m not going to use his name), made the statement / question “… why do you need military grade weapons…”
In response, I reject the entire premise of “military grade” as he and many others try to define it. Why? Well lets see; once upon a time muskets were “military grade” -Hell even “big stick’s” could once have been classified as “military grade weapons”. WWII surplus bolt action Enfield rifles were / are sold to the general public. These bolt action rifles, being formerly used by the military would definitely qualify as “military grade”. The style of rifle commonly recognized as a “hunting” rifle essentially has identical features and in most cases is of higher quality than the bolt action rifles that all the armies used during WWI and WWI to kill each other. Does that make your Ruger m77 or Winchester a “military grade weapon?”
Now let’s fast forward to an “assault rifle” Why would anyone need an assault rifle? This is a question often asked / used by the anti-gun. Usually under the guise of pro “sensible gun control” It’s effective. It generates an immediate emotional response. After all how could an intelligent, sane person defend the average Joe citizen running around the city with a bunch of military equipment designed to hurt and kill innocent people?
Let’s honestly look at some features to determine what an “assault rifle” is. First off it is often defined as a weapon being capable of firing in semi automatic fashion. With that definition, your browning semi auto shotgun you use for duck hunting, all 1911 style handguns, your uncles 30-06 semi auto deer rifle –that looks almost like your bolt action, are all “assault weapons”. –sometimes they add “removable magazine to the definition. Even with that addition, essentially all afore mentioned weapons are included.
If you include the capacity to fire fully automatic (aka machinegun), then virtually all of the very weapons the anti’s are trying to regulate out of your hands are excluded because they are not fully automatic weapons. Note: it’s already illegal to modify a gun (any gun) to fire fully automatic. It’s already illegal to poses a machine gun without a special (I’m a good guy with special knowledge and skills) permit.
So, honestly, besides the caliber, what is the difference between an AR style rife and a semi auto 30-06 that essentially looks like a “traditional rifle”? I’ll take the liberty of answering this for you. It’s how they “look”. It’s not how they function. One is not particularly more deadly than the other.
Oh, don’t tell anyone but, there is no magic caliber that will make someone more dead than another… It only takes 1 properly placed shot from any caliber, to make something dead. With that in mind, does it really matter if a magazine only holds 2 or 3 rounds, or 50, 100, 1000…?
If you broke into my home at 3:00am would you be more alert and or nervous if you were met by me holding: A- a .50 cal Hawken muzzle loader leveled at your head. B – a .22 cal Ruger10-22 with a bananna clip leveled at your head C- a 12 ga. SxS leveled at your head D – a .25 cal pistol leveled at your head E – a .50 cal Desert Eagle leveled at your head. Or F- Any of the above will equally cause me to pause.
Some parting thoughts:
If we ban water, will there be no more drowning?
If we ban alcohol, will there be no more deaths from drunken drivers?
If we ban tempers, will there be no more beatings?
If we ban knifes, will there be no more stabbings?
Please show me 1 instance where a gun –any gun, has loaded itself, cocked itself, pointed itself and shot at anything. –It does not even have to a documented story involving the death of anything. Just one documented story of a gun doing all those things all by itself. All I ask for is just one story where a person was not involved, by doing those actions.
Then I’ll start blaming guns and stop blaming people.
PS – It’s already illegal to do the things we have recently been reading about. It’s already illegal to own or poses a firearm if you are deemed mentally incompetent. It’s already illegal to own or poses a firearm if you are a felon. It’s already illegal to shoot people out side of a self defense situation (in some places it’s even illegal to shoot someone in self defense).
Take a peek at where the most restrictive gun laws are and compare that with the statistics of where you are most likely to be shot. Take a look at where mass shootings have historically been documented to happen and compare that with the areas labled “gun free zones”.
Take a look at the statistics of how many people actually doing the shooting are doing it with an illegally possessed firearm, or obtained the firearm through illegal methods. – Then ask yourself who will we be taking firearms away from with more restrictive gun laws? "
Rob Hawes-Anchorage Rod Works-Anchorage, Alaska
Last edited by White Lightning; 01-11-2013 at 01:28 PM.