Assault Rifle Ban

[SeanGAR]

Originally Posted by spooble

The 2nd amendment guarantees a right... it doesn't address a need. There is a distinct difference.

I didn't realize that assault rifles were available when the second amendment was written.

Just as an fyi, I see no problem with law abiding citizens owning automatic weapons if they want to play with them at the range. I admit they'd be a little much for hunting though.

[elderboy02]

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

I didn't realize that assault rifles were available when the second amendment was written.

...

The Internet wasn't around when the 1st Amendment was written. I guess we should still be writing on parchment paper and not the internet.

Just an FYI, I am not making fun of you, just making a point.

Originally Posted by elderboy02

The Internet wasn't around when the 1st Amendment was written. I guess we should still be writing on parchment paper and not the internet.

Just an FYI, I am not making fun of you, just making a point.

LOL

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

I didn't realize that assault rifles were available when the second amendment was written.

Just as an fyi, I see no problem with law abiding citizens owning automatic weapons if they want to play with them at the range. I admit they'd be a little much for hunting though.

The liberal media wants you to think that all weapons are used for hunting. The number one reason people own guns including assault rifles is for PROTECTION of their life, property, and freedoms. This is the reason for the second amendment. If a person or government threatens any of these we have the RIGHT and RESPONSIBILITY to defend our freedoms per the second amendment.

[SeanGAR]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

The liberal media wants you to think that all weapons are used for hunting. The number one reason people own guns including assault rifles is for PROTECTION of their life, property, and freedoms. This is the reason for the second amendment. If a person or government threatens any of these we have the RIGHT and RESPONSIBILITY to defend our freedoms per the second amendment.

Liberal media? What are you taking about? I make my own mind up and don't give a rats ass what others think.

And don't presume to lecture me about reasons for owning guns .. I've owned firearms since I was 13 and have more in my house than I can count on my fingers, thank you very much.

My POINT, which I will repeat, is that any "right to bear arms" was written with muzzle loaders in mind. Thus, you should not PRESUME that the founding fathers believed that other weapons, defined as arms, belong in peoples hands. So I get really really tired of that same old baloney when people talk about the second amendment in relation to weapons that were not even dreamed of in the founding fathers time.

Now, I believe that they do belong in the hands of law abiding citizens if they want to own them. And I also believe this assault weapon baloney is a joke. You can be just as easily killed by a "hunting rifle" as "assault rifle", there is no difference except in aesthetics (perhaps mag capacity too, but that is a minor difference). But this is not a belief related to the 2nd amendment, it is a belief related to the freedom of citizens to do whatever the hill they want to without government interference as long as you are not harming others.

[atlharp]

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

I didn't realize that assault rifles were available when the second amendment was written.

Just as an fyi, I see no problem with law abiding citizens owning automatic weapons if they want to play with them at the range. I admit they'd be a little much for hunting though.

Military grade "assault weapons" were available during the time when the second amendment was written. Indeed, the same Short Land Service Musket that was used by the British was used by our soldiers as well. Indeed our soldiers used them to "assault" the British and run them out of our country and back up to Canada or Britain.

The Second Amendment exists to allow citizens to protect themselves from their government. It's a great provision because it does not allow the government to gain imperium over the lives of citizens (like socialized medicine or punitive taxation) with the expectation that we have the ability to push back with the most extreme means. The second amendment exists so that we do not turn into a bunch of sheep (like Europe and Canada) who are made serfs and knaves with the insecure and pathetic promise of "free" healthcare and an assurance that their government will not throw them into concentration camps.

Americans chafe at the notion of being owned by their government and the second amendment is the explicit declaration that we will never be.

ATL

Originally Posted by atlharp

Military grade "assault weapons" were available during the time when the second amendment was written. Indeed, the same Short Land Service Musket that was used by the British was used by our soldiers as well. Indeed our soldiers used them to "assault" the British and run them out of our country and back up to Canada or Britain.

The Second Amendment exists to allow citizens to protect themselves from their government. It's a great provision because it does not allow the government to gain imperium over the lives of citizens (like socialized medicine or punitive taxation) with the expectation that we have the ability to push back with the most extreme means. The second amendment exists so that we do not turn into a bunch of sheep (like Europe and Canada) who are made serfs and knaves with the insecure and pathetic promise of "free" healthcare and an assurance that their government will not throw them into concentration camps.

Americans chafe at the notion of being owned by their government and the second amendment is the explicit declaration that we will never be.

ATL

Preach on Brother!!!! We need more people that think like you in this country.

[SeanGAR]

Originally Posted by atlharp

Military grade "assault weapons" were available during the time when the second amendment was written. Indeed, the same Short Land Service Musket that was used by the British was used by our soldiers as well. Indeed our soldiers used them to "assault" the British and run them out of our country and back up to Canada or Britain.

How many shots per second you get with one of those? Can you compare that to my Browning BAR .308? Now how about an AR15?

I am sooooooooo glad I am staying out of this thread......

[atlharp]

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

How many shots per second you get with one of those? Can you compare that to my Browning BAR .308? Now how about an AR15?

The shot ration in a specific amount of time is irrelevant. Bolt action rifles have been known to produce rates of fire in the right hands that rival automatic weapons. The Lee Enfield is the notable one:

"The fast-operating Lee bolt-action and large magazine capacity enabled a trained rifleman to fire between 20 to 30 aimed rounds a minute, making the Lee-Enfield the fastest military bolt-action rifle of the day. The current world record for aimed bolt-action fire was set in 1914 by a musketry instructor in the British Army — Sergeant Instructor Snoxall — who placed 38 rounds into a 12" target at 300 yards (270 m) in one minute." This is well known among Military circles and shows that even bolt action rifles (though not being all big, black and scary to the eunuchs of gun control as that AR-15), can be comparable to modern day "assault" weapons.

The amount of fire is useless if that amount is not aimed and carried through efficiently. I believe one of the worst things to happen in warfare was automatic weapons. It gave armies the false notion that more bullets were better. The reality is that the quality of fire used with proper tactical suppression gives armies the advantage. That is a big reason why our guys have their M-16's with the 3 round burst setting. The automatic fire is really functionally useless unless it's purpose is to flood a particular area with fire-power. In those circumstances, that is when air-support is called in.

Overall, The great thing about AR-15's , Ak-47's, and any other rifle is that it gives the civilian the advantage of being able to defend themselves from their government. The sale and possession of such weapons is important for that alone, and anyone who seeks to disable the citizenry from that right, ultimately undermines their humanity and jeopardizes all their other rights as well.

ATL

Originally Posted by atlharp

The shot ration in a specific amount of time is irrelevant. Bolt action rifles have been known to produce rates of fire in the right hands that rival automatic weapons. The Lee Enfield is the notable one:

"The fast-operating Lee bolt-action and large magazine capacity enabled a trained rifleman to fire between 20 to 30 aimed rounds a minute, making the Lee-Enfield the fastest military bolt-action rifle of the day. The current world record for aimed bolt-action fire was set in 1914 by a musketry instructor in the British Army — Sergeant Instructor Snoxall — who placed 38 rounds into a 12" target at 300 yards (270 m) in one minute." This is well known among Military circles and shows that even bolt action rifles (though not being all big, black and scary to the eunuchs of gun control as that AR-15), can be comparable to modern day "assault" weapons.

The amount of fire is useless if that amount is not aimed and carried through efficiently. I believe one of the worst things to happen in warfare was automatic weapons. It gave armies the false notion that more bullets were better. The reality is that the quality of fire used with proper tactical suppression gives armies the advantage. That is a big reason why our guys have their M-16's with the 3 round burst setting. The automatic fire is really functionally useless unless it's purpose is to flood a particular area with fire-power. In those circumstances, that is when air-support is called in.

Overall, The great thing about AR-15's , Ak-47's, and any other rifle is that it gives the civilian the advantage of being able to defend themselves from their government. The sale and possession of such weapons is important for that alone, and anyone who seeks to disable the citizenry from that right, ultimately undermines their humanity and jeopardizes all their other rights as well.

ATL

ATL, i tried to give you some more rep for that post but it said that i must spread it around to others first. Great Post!!!!!

i was a big proponent of letting the ban sunset when it came around. i was really excited about it not getting renewed. the funny thing is that i haven't bought anything big since then.

the one thing when people talk about the ban is that everyone keeps confusing automatic weapons and these so called "assault weapons". i know it's been said a few times in this thread but others keep bringing them up as if they are the same thing. fully automatic weapons were banned in 1934 and are still banned and will be banned/restricted to civilian use.

the "assault weapons ban" that bill clinton helped put into effect did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to lower violent crime rates. in short, i'm glad it didn't get pushed through and i do not believe we will see another ban again. the media scare tactics were always great, they used the words uzi and fully automatic so much that it just made the gun savy people laugh. violence was suppose to flood the streets and mass murder was suppose to happen all the time. yet none of it has.

[spectrrr]

Originally Posted by Tombstone

ATL, i tried to give you some more rep for that post but it said that i must spread it around to others first. Great Post!!!!!

very well said ATL

[cbsmokin]

I see validity on both sides of the argument, but in the mean time I am stocking up because if the bad guys have them I want them to.

[mojo65]

Originally Posted by SeanGAR

I didn't realize that assault rifles were available when the second amendment was written.

Just as an fyi, I see no problem with law abiding citizens owning automatic weapons if they want to play with them at the range. I admit they'd be a little much for hunting though.

See the picture of Mr Heston on page one of this thread. The Black powder rifle in his hands was the assault rifle of its day.