'Assault Weapon' Ban Sunset: Your thoughts?

[VorLonUK]

quote:
Originally posted by: Rocky
If anyone wants to know why the majority of the population wants these guns banned its this.

"They are fun and also good for scaring Liberal Gunaphobics....Not to mention ventilating home invaders...If only Elian's American family had had an AK-47 or 2....."

So people that think like that dont get their hands on them.  I think that just convinced me of the ban

I think moreover, why would Any Civilian want Assault Weapons? It just seems like a crazy mentality to me. How many would buy Hand grenades, Rocket launchers and Even battlefield nuclear weapons if they could? - now that's the question!

[Timster]

An assault weapon becomes an assault weapon only when someone ASSAULTS somebody with it!  These rifles do not function any different than any other semi-auto sporting or hunting rifle.  If I have no intention other than taking a rifle out to the range and punch holes in paper or knock down steel targets, and use it in a safe and responsible manner, why is it still wrong?  I've known people that hunt whitetail deer with an AK-47.  To comply to the hunting laws, they use a 5 round magazine, and use hollowpoint hunting ammunition.  In thick brush and heavy woods, it's not much different that carrying a lever action carbine.  Besides, in that environment, there are seldom any shots longer than 75-100 meters, so there's still plenty of knockdown power with the rigth ammunition.

[JungleJoe]

yes, you COULD go hunting with one. My uncle went hunting for pigs w/ his M16 while he was in Vietnam. not very sporting, but neither was grenade fishing.... anyway, the point is that you dont NEED to go hunting with an AK47. As you said, there are many other guns that would work as well. So whats more important? Having th choice to use something that you dont NEED to use to hunt or shoot at targets with, or a safter community? you tell me.

[Arrow]

quote:
anyway, the point is that you dont NEED to go hunting with an AK47. As you said, there are many other guns that would work as well. So whats more important? Having th choice to use something that you dont NEED to use to hunt or shoot at targets with, or a safter community?

You've got a flaw in your argument. The range on assault rifles isn't that greet; these aren't high powered sniper rifles. Secondly, you're not going to have an outdoor shooting range close enough to any other building or gathering spot to be dangerous - if it is, someone is going to have to move. And if you're shooting within a few hundred yards of house when hunting, you're being dangerous and irresponsible, regardless of your weapon. Your concerns are pretty much covered basic gun safety.

[Rugged]

in CA you cant hunt pigs with an m-16, the bullets are too small and do too little damage.  sks or ak-47 is ok though.

I want assault weapons because I never know when I'll need to assault someone.  I live in a place where there is a foreign army living among us just waiting for a signal to get us.  Plus I live in the only state in that foreign troops have even a sllight chance of invading.  foreign troops that use ak-47s so i'll be ok when my on-hand 3600 rounds runs out.

I want a springfield m1a national match with a 30 round box for long range sniping on our southern border.


Plus it's my right.  As is said on the finest redenck bumper stickers "To get my gun they'll have to pry it from my cold, dead fingers"

[JungleJoe]

Are you seriously trying to say the Mexican army ihas even a twitch of a thought of "invading" the US? I also live in California. About 10 miles from the border. That statement is so bogus I dont even know where to begin.

BTW, he was hunting the pigs with full auto.

Arrow: First, I never liked the original AW ban. It was moronic. Limiting guns due to the # of bullets it can hold or cosmetic features is borderline retarded.

Also, I never said anyhitnig about people using these @ shooting ranges while being a threat. I have no idea where you got that from. You need to re-read what I posted.


and just to make a final point. Yes. It is your right to own a fire arm. It is your right to use it to protect yor self. It is your right to use it for hunting or target practice. It doesnt say ANYWHERE that you should have unlimited options as to WHAT that gun is, however.

You want a gun that they can pry from your cold dead hands? Go buy a flint lock. Thats what they had in mind when the founding fathers wrote down that "right" .

[Rugged]

I think that if the mexicnas that are here decided to take over, you'd be in deep dood dah.  that's what I think.   It's a soft invasion.  thing is, they've already won and they know it.

plus, the founding fathers were thinking flintlock, beacuse they hadn't seen a battle rifle yet.

in order for the second amendment to be viable, the citizenry needs access to the same weapons the military has.  rocket launchers, grenade guns, TOW missiles, m249s etc...

[Arrow]

quote:
Also, I never said anyhitnig about people using these @ shooting ranges while being a threat. I have no idea where you got that from. You need to re-read what I posted.

I got shooting ranges from "shoot at targets".

[BallisticGelatin]

quote:
If anyone wants to know why the majority of the population wants these guns banned its this.

Where the heck did you pull that 'fact' from?  Wait a sec, I don't want to know.

quote:
So people that think like that dont get their hands on them. I think that just convinced me of the ban

My sincerest apologies, man.  I have a tendancy to simplify things when I am talking to anti-gunners....But seriously, the AWB didn't accomplish a thing as far as "Making our streets Safer".  The FBI's own studies illustrate this.  And here's the thing,  if I shot someone with my Bill Clinton approved Post AWB AR-15 rifle (sans bayonet lug and flash suppressor), they would be just as dead as if they were shot with the 'evil' version of the AR-15.  So what did the Assault Weapon Ban really accomplish?  Zero, zippo, nothing, nada, the big doughnut!!

And as far as the whole hunting with assault weapons thing....the Second Amendment was NOT about hunting.  It was to make sure that American citizens could take care of our enemies...be they criminals, foreign invaders, or home-grown despots.

[Rugged]

quote:
here's the thing,  if I shot someone with my Bill Clinton approved Post AWB AR-15 rifle (sans bayonet lug and flash suppressor), they would be just as dead as if they were shot with the 'evil' version of the AR-15.  So what did the Assault Weapon Ban really accomplish?  Zero, zippo, nothing, nada, the big doughnut!!
.

The history of every democrat social policy to date

[Timster]

What's not sporting about using a semi-auto AK-47 with a 5 round magazine?  It's not like you're going out the "spray lead" at the beast!  The 7.62x39 round is very similar in performance to a 30-30, and is more than effective at a range less than 100 yards.  I've never shot a deer beyond 80 yards, so that's not a problem.

[JungleJoe]

who said its not sporting? thats not the point.

[Rocky]

"My sincerest apologies, man. I have a tendancy to simplify things when I am talking to anti-gunners....But seriously, the AWB didn't accomplish a thing as far as "Making our streets Safer". The FBI's own studies illustrate this. And here's the thing, if I shot someone with my Bill Clinton approved Post AWB AR-15 rifle (sans bayonet lug and flash suppressor), they would be just as dead as if they were shot with the 'evil' version of the AR-15. So what did the Assault Weapon Ban really accomplish? Zero, zippo, nothing, nada, the big doughnut!!"

So you are saying we should make the ban more strict?  So it will do some good.  I think the people would be just as for that.  And if you are wondering where I pulled the majority of hte people are for it fact, you can read any article on any news site about the ban and see that, or you can simply look and see that the President half ass supports it so you know what the polls are saying.

"And as far as the whole hunting with assault weapons thing....the Second Amendment was NOT about hunting. It was to make sure that American citizens could take care of our enemies...be they criminals, foreign invaders, or home-grown despots."

Oh I see, its similar to the 3/5s amendment? Both arcane and filled with brainwash?

[BallisticGelatin]

quote:
So you are saying we should make the ban more strict? So it will do some good.

Your definition of good is very different from mine on this subject.  Disarming law abiding citizens (you know, the only people who will obey a gun ban law) will only get more of those same law abiding citizens killed.  Approximately one million times a year a crime is foiled by a gun owning American.  That's the FBI's own numbers....and that's only the incidents REPORTED to the FBI....the actual numbers of times that guns are used to stop crimes is probably much higher.

And no, even stricter controls on firearms that the Liberal Media like to call 'assault weapons' will not accomplish much as far as 'Making our streets Safer', because those types of weapons were only used in an infinitesimally small number of crimes before the ban.  

quote:
Oh I see, its similar to the 3/5s amendment? Both arcane and filled with brainwash?

Uh huh....if one of the Amendments doesn't fit in with our little world view, it must be 'arcane and filled with brainwash'....The Founding Fathers thought that the right to keep and bear arms was so important that the only right ahead of it was the right to free speech....But maybe the First Amendment is also 'arcane and filled with brainwash' as you put it.

[Rocky]

"Uh huh....if one of the Amendments doesn't fit in with our little world view, it must be 'arcane and filled with brainwash'....The Founding Fathers thought that the right to keep and bear arms was so important that the only right ahead of it was the right to free speech....But maybe the First Amendment is also 'arcane and filled with brainwash' as you put it."

Not a con law student are you?  The first amendment is actually quite arcane, thats why theres been about 100 MAJOR supreme court cases redefining it over and over again.  Maybe you missed those?  Also since you brought up our founding fathers, did you know they also didnt give women and blacks the right to vote?  In that same document you hold so dear when you are cleaning your gun.  The constitution is an arcane document, I dont think anyone will doubt that.  Thats why we have a Supreme Court that continually redefines it to fit society, because nothing in the bill of rights exist today like it did when they were originally voted on.  You should check out a history book or a con law book and read, its quite interesting.  Maybe then youll realize that "the right to bear arms" the "right to free speech" both have very very very little relation to how it was orignally used.  You also might realize that the amendments that the founding fathers created are incredibly bigoted so much so youd look liberal

[Zut50]

quote:
Originally posted by: Timster
What's not sporting about using a semi-auto AK-47 with a 5 round magazine?  It's not like you're going out the "spray lead" at the beast!  The 7.62x39 round is very similar in performance to a 30-30, and is more than effective at a range less than 100 yards.  I've never shot a deer beyond 80 yards, so that's not a problem.

Sporting? To slaughter a defenseless animal with an automatic rifle. Its bad enough using a shotgun, but that is just plain sick.

[Timster]

Read the quote Zut!  A SEMI-AUTO AK-47 WITH A 5 ROUND MAGAZINE!  Where did I say anything about mowing down animals with an automatic weapon?  When is dropping a deer with a single round with an AK-47 different than say, dropping a deer with a single round from a Winchester 94 lever action?  The hunting law in Michigan allows for single shot or semi-auto rifle (they make semi-auto versions of the AK) with a capacity of 5 rounds (they make 5 round mags for AK) that must have a bullet diameter larger than .22 caliber (7.62x39 is .311 caliber.)

[Zut50]

Fair enough. I suppose this proves how little I know about guns!! But I still feel sick!

Maybe Ill just shut up!

[Overkill]

quote:
When is dropping a deer with a single round with an AK-47 different than say, dropping a deer with a single round from a Winchester 94 lever action?

Apart from one is more accurate, especially over distance,  than the other, none I'd say..............

[Timster]

Have you ever fired an AK, or a Winchester 94?  Neither are tack drivers, but they are both in the 2-3 MOA range, and that's more than enough to hit the vital organs of a deer sized animal up to 200 yards.  Of course, I wouldn't use the 30-30 or the 7.62x39 over 150 yards to achieve a clean kill.  In the areas of Michigan where rifle hunting is allowed, the woods are dense enough that you will hardly see for than 80-100 yards, so knockdown power and accuracy.  When you strip all the Hollywood horror and half truths away, these weapons are not much different from those used for hunting and shooting sports, and their purpose lies within the user, unlike a grenade, battleship or a cruise missle.  There are weapons like the VEPR rifle and the Saiga shotgun which both designed and sold for hunting, which are based on the Kalashnikov design and function and fire exactly like any other AK variant.

Zut, I welcome your opinions, but all I ask next time is to read a little closer, and don't go off half-cocked.  If something is not clear, don't be afraid to ask.  When I replied to you I was just a little cranky because I thought the Dark Ages were long gone and believed people understood that some objects are not possessed by demons and cause people to do evil things through black magic.  I'll slap some leeches on and bleed myself the next time I feel a possession coming on.

[BallisticGelatin]

quote:
I thought the Dark Ages were long gone and believed people understood that some objects are not possessed by demons and cause people to do evil things through black magic.

Hear hear!

[Overkill]

quote:
Have you ever fired an AK, or a Winchester 94

No, I'm quite pleased to say I haven't. However, I do know plenty of Americans that have, and in fact I showed one your post. He laughed! He's hunted in the mountains around Georgia for years and wondered from your comments if you had ever used an AK-47?  

But seriously, he felt that the AK-47 was a poor choice for accuracy compared to a specialised hunting rifle. His opinion (and the rest of his crowd apparently), not mine, I don't know a thing about hunting rifles! Shotguns yes, rifles no.

quote:
Hear hear!

To what? That was trolling at its best.

[Timster]

Yes, I have fired several AK variants, and I have a co-worker that brings back his bag limit in deer every season with one.  Under 100 yards, the accuracy when firing a single shot is acceptable.  If you were to relate  the size of the vital organs to the size of a pie plate, your shots will all land on that plate.  You won't get a pretty string of shots, but they'll be on the pie plate.  You have to know the limitations of the weapon and work within them.  Another accuracy factor is ammunition.  A box of Remington UMC or Winchester hollowpoint ammunition will perform better than a box of surplus Romanian ball ammo.

I agree that an AK-47 would not be my first consideration, nor would a lever action rifle like the Winchester 94 or a 1895 Marlin.  I'm prefer a bolt action rifle for reliability and simplicity. Yes, you are correct a specialized hunting rifle will have a better fit an finish than one built for combat.  That's why I mentioned the VEPR and Saiga.  They are built to tighter specs and their stocks and handguards are made of higher quality wood than their combat cousin.  Either way you want a weapon that performs well under a variety of weather conditions and works when you need it to.  That's what makes it hard for legislators to create laws about one and not the other when they are identical other than fit and finish.