I see you found it very difficult to understand me. I use that term to differentiate such guns from other thigns such as non-firearm objects. While it is quite possible to kill someone using a pipe wrench, the pipe wrench was designed to adjust pipes, not kill people. Hence, it is a "plumbing tool". The assault rifle or SMG (Auto and semi-auto) were designed for the sole purpose of maiming and killing humans. hence, they are "human-killing tools". Since they are also firearms, they can be called "human-killing guns". This is also to differentiate from other types of guns, particularly hunting rifles and shotguns. With a shotgun, it is primarily desiged to hunt wild animals for food or sport, and it is more difficult to kill using one (though much easier to seriously injure) than using any other firearm, leaving harming people as a secondary purpose at the most. Similar is a hunting rifle; killing very quickly isn't as important as imobilizing the game animal, so they generally aren't as effective at killing humans or piercing walls and armor as they are at hunting. Hence, they could be termed "hunting/sport firearms".

As for your AK-47, even if it is semi-auto, it can still be fired very fast by hand, as much as 4-6 rounds a second (instead of the 10/s of a full auto 47). Also, even granting that, and the fact that it only carries 10 rounds (which is still more than one would need for self defense or hunting), it still is designed to fire bullets that are naturally armor and wall-piercing. Of course, if you have no ammunition for it, then it's not more deadly than any other firearm, unless it has a bayonet (a completely different element), where then it's about as good as a knife (better range, but not as agile and quick). If your gun is even LOADED, then you're inviting any criminal that knows about it to try to steal it, and it's hard to keep any secrets.


I don't like it when I post a serious, well thought-out argument, and the best somebody else can do is make a joke out of it. Though it shows they are incabale of arguing against my point in any serious fasion, it also shows that they have not/will not correct their viewpoint to a case that's better supported by its evidence (read: more true)


I hate it when people try to blame problems anything of the new generation, such as music, television, and games. Even if we eliminated all computer games, society still provides knowledge of murder, which is still enough to get some people to consider killing.

In 1994 the ban was introduced. In 1997 criminals in North Hollywood tried to rob a bank with fully automatic AK47s with drum magazines and armor piercing rounds. How did they obtain these? Illegally. The ban effects no one else but law-abiding citizens. Anyone freaking out about this ban expiring is either uninformed or just blind.

Fully automatic weapons are not actually fully illegal, you must have a Class III license in order to purchase these. This takes extensive background checks, alot of money and a 6 month waiting period.

Please, read previous posts before posting yourself, or you'll look like a fool, which you have just done.


The extra requirements for full auto weapons are good, but obviously not enough. If you've read (and acutally thought about) my posts, you'll realize that it would be much better to simply ban civilian use of all automatic firearms.

it's people like you who are wishing doom on this country when the aliens get here

Really? Sorry, real life is nothing like movies or games. If an alien invasion comes, highly disorganized civilians toting guns won't stop it; it would be largely up to the militaries, despite the fact that they always fail in the movies.

you don't seem to realize... i know when the alien invasion will get here and it was a group of civilians with guns that stopped it

i read about it in history class back in 2469... then it was mentioned by one of the NPCs in Duke Nukem Forever on the third level... some guy goes "Man this is just like what happened in 2045... Same friggin aliens" man i wish i could have stayed in 2471... we actually HAD DNF then... never even got to play the multiplayer modes...

nottheking: you need to check your facts. I did a very thorough research paper in college (like... 2 years ago?) about this very subject. Many states have outright banned pistols and rifles such as these, and guess what happened to their violent crime rate? It went up significantly.

When CA enacted their assault rifle ban, and they did go knocking on every registered owners door to take it away with no compensation, the violent crime rate went up. In areas where guns are fully allowed and encouraged, the violent crime rate went down. The problem is, there is a population of criminals out there. Weapons on the black market are extremely easy to get, esp. in states that border mexico.

You are arguing this on an emotional level with misinformation and lies. On top of that, you are telling people they look like fools for not reading your misleading and frankly wrong posts. You obviously didn't read the first post which states that this ban did nothing for the crime rate, did nothing for anyone, and was a purely emotional ban to begin with.

Anyone who keeps insisting that guns are simply to kill people - if you're over 21, come up to seattle and I'll take you shooting. I've been out shooting hundreds of times and I've never hit or killed any living thing. It's a recreational activity, it relieves stress, keeps me ready in case I ever really have to use it, and is a ton of fun! We shoot everything from glass bottles to clay targets to spinning targets to rotten fruit to whatever else looks like a good target.

Nobody in my family or circle of friends has ever had to use their weapon against another human being. But I tell you what, as soon as someone breaks into my house and tries to do something to my girlfriend or anyone else staying here, they will get a faceful of lead and I won't have one regret about it.

And Brian basically just said what I was going to.

Thanks but I'd rather not, I was not addressing you or anyone in specific. I prefer to stay out of arguments. I merely posting my thoughts in reply to the first few replies I had seen which were before the argument. If my comment looks foolish to you well...I simply don't care because I'm not getting into petty arguments.

remind me never to step foot in america....

yeah remind me to never step foot in americ... wait a sec...

Are you guys criminals? Is THAT why you're so afraid of showing up here? Come on, visit me!

well i kill people every day... with a random object... rocks, axes, hammers... never a gun... murder with a gun ... there's just no passion in it... it's all pull the trigger, bang, it's over...

and don't blame video games... blame bad music... the boybands made me do it

I would probably waste many hours at [url]www.lolmygun.com[/url]

dont make it or I'll shoot your face off with my dog-killing gun

For some reason I now want to go shooting with Brian...

Funny that.

I think the idea behind the law is that "Why would a civilian /need/ an automatic weapon?"

You can't go hunting with it.. (Well, you could..) Using it to defend yourself/family, it would be just as easy with a semi-auto, wouldn't it?

Automatic weapons aren't made for protection or hunting.. There is also a lot better chance of hitting other people. (Mob fight starts up, someone gets out an automatic rifle and starts spewing bullets.. a lot more bystander casualities are possible.)

Now, maybe the law sucked. I don't know, but I think there should be /some/ law against them.

I think semi-auto and full-auto assault rifles should be limited to being collectors items because that's really the only practical application. Sure, you can still take the rifle to the range to go shooting, but I don't think it's wise to keep it in your house as a deterrent. That's a role for a pistol.

So.... The goverment is banning things for looking dangerous? And they're the ones who believe giant purple dinosaurs are good for teaching toddlers.

WEither way you're probably going to die. The crow bar is silent- and will hurt allot more. You have a chance at surviving if he has a gun. He only has one shot before he has to flee, and if you survive, you will get help almost immediately because of the report. And if you have a gun, you can hold him off at long range, and you don’t have to worry about getting away because you want the police.

Why are half the arguments for the banning of AR's essentially "You don't need them so why make them legal"?

Ok, reasons for repealing the ban & against gun control in general:

1. An AR is a very poor weapon for killing someone. It's loud, large, heavy, and hard to conceal. Besides, you don't need 20 bullets in some one when you only need one. If you want to kill a person the AR is *not* the way to go.

2. No half way intelligent criminal buys a gun legally. Legal guns can be tracked from the bullet. illegal guns can't. Also illegal guns are much cheaper. A ban on legal guns won't make any difference in the Black market.

3. Many people enjoy collecting guns, and firing them at the ranges for competitions. Marksmanship is a good competitive sport.

4. If every one had a gun criminals would think twice about trying to hurt any one. A criminal may be able to beat up a woman with his hand or a crow bar, but there's a much better chance he won't come away from a gun fight with the same person alive.

5. All you base are belong to us!

...a typical AR-15 is .223 caliber, which in many states is illegal to hunt with because it isn't powerful enough to kill a deer with one shot. The AK-47 is traditionally chambered in 7.62x39, which is approximately equivalent to a .30-30.

The only difference between a semi-automatic "assault rifle" and an autoloading "hunting rifle" is that assault rifles look scary and have evil, deadly features like folding stocks and pistol grips. Hunting rifles are also typically more accurate and chambered for larger rounds, but you can buy either kind of rifle in practically any caliber.

Here's a very interesting article on the topic:

http://rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_3170631,00.html

The point is simple: It's not going to stop evil people from getting the more powerful weapons. Since it's not going to do that, there is no point in having the ban. All it will do is make it more difficult for innocent, law-abiding people to get them.

I'm amazed at the number of people who have posted here who seem to jerk back in fear at the thought of seeing a gun of some kind, as if being in the presence of one would be a threat to their life. Good grief, you're more likely to die in a car accident on the way to the USA than you are to be shot by a gun in the USA. Go bury yourselves in an underground shelter or something.

That doesn't even mention all the lives that are saved and the crimes that are stopped by armed, law-abiding citizens. Take a look at this:

http://www.nrapublications.org/armed%20citizen/index.asp

in Indiana it's illegal to hunt with a rifle more powerful than a .22 unless it's a muzzleloader

it's all shotguns and black powder for this state

in other words killing a deer with one shot is not at all common...

Hey, considering at least 150 000 million people in america would want me dead if they actually knew who I was - and now they've got automatic rifles.. No thank you.

But the general idea is;

If I make a living out of robbing people's houses, and I'm breaking into a house in.. say, eastern canada... well, I'm not gonna be too worried about my safety, because no one here has guns.. not even puny little pistols.

On the other hand, if I'm robbing a house in america, I know there's a good chance the owner will immediately pull out a gun (or assault rifle) and start shooting at me. So what am I gonna do? I'm gonna shoot you before you shoot me.

i knew you were fred durst in disguise

I thought the goatee gave it away.

You obviously don't understand the point of freedom. Nowhere in the constitution does it tell me I have to justify to the government my reasons for owning or buying an item. ANY ITEM. You could argue that people don't NEED computer games, big cars, small cars, kleenex, fancy carpet, crappy carpet, ETC.

The point is that at some point, we as citizens may be required to overthrow our government. It's not to that point yet, but the founders of the country had to do it about 200 years ago and they recognize the fact that it's possible for the governement to get out of hand and need to be reigned in. A government should serve the people, not control the people. The governement should only pass laws that help people, not harm people. It should be fair, equitable, and SMALL.

Plus, this thread isn't about automatic weapons - full autos are still banned in most states (I think you can legally get them in AZ but I'm not sure). This was simply a ban on semi automatic rifles that "look" dangerous (ha ha as if any gun ISN'T dangerous!).

I tell you one thing: If some psycho is in a restaurant or school shooting innocents, you'll be glad as hell if I'm there too, because I'll put a bullet or 5 in his chest and save your ***.

Have you ever been shooting? I assure you, I could just as easily kill you with a rifle meant for bringing down dear and other large animals as with an assault rifle. A high-power rifle meant for taking things down that are 5 times the size of a human being would have no problem bringing down a person.

The item used to kill someone is irrelivent. You kill someone, they're dead, and you did it. You can't assume a firearm is the cause of the death. You act as if the now dead person insulted the rifle, which offended it's owner, and he let his gun loose on the other person. It's not like a gun is a dog pulling from the colar in the direction of someone else. It's a few pieces of metal and maybe wood sitting there. You can't "loose control" of a firearm and shoot someone. Something has to go wrong, where you were irrisponsable, or you intended to kill the person. Exact same way a pair of pliars doesn't find it's way to the screw. You need to pick it up and use it. It's a tool that is used to kill. It can be used to kill people, animals, or the red dot in the middle of a target. You happen to think it's a signed contract to shoot someone when you purchas a gun.

We own 4 powder guns that we shoot regularly for fun, because the power and challenge behind shooting beer-cans. We own a 9mm pistol for protection of the home, and because it's also a fun gun to fire. We have a BB gun sitting behind the book shelf next to my door, in case we've got a serious problem, but can't get to the real gun. We've used all of them for fun, rather than to kill people. We also use the long knives in our kitchen for cutting meat, rather than boring people's skin open.

JediKirby

At first glance I thought this thread was titled "Assault Rifle Brian May May Expire." I was like wtf, bruddah.

The only people in the entire world that should be allowed to have guns are the military, law enforcement, and people that use it as a necessity to live (native american's, hunter's, etc). There's too many idiots in the world to let a lethal weapon roam freely into whoever's hands it wants to go.

Sometimes military and law enforcement can be idiots. Ever think of that?

There are a million objects that can be used as lethal weapons, including the human body. Should we only allow the military and law enforcement to have arms and legs too?

And when was the last time that inanimate objects roamed freely of their own accord?

Geez. Comments like that make me sick.

I'm sick of these comments like "the item that was used to kill someone doesn't matter. Anything can kill a person". That's stupid. Guns are a lot more dangerous than other objects. A nuke is just an object too. Should we let any schmuck have them? No, I didn't think so. Same goes with guns.

The point is to minimize the risk. You're at less of a risk when a gun is in the hand of a cop than it is in a psychopath's.

Brian- I think there's a big difference between carpets and automatic rifles..
While I personally think that it would be better to have no guns (edit- I'm dumb.) , I see your point (in general, not directed necesarily at Brian) to have guns.

I don't understand how having the 'freedom' to shoot 120 bulelts per minute (arbitrary number. I'm assuming that some shoot faster than that, and some slower) would have /any/ use except for: A. Overthrowing the government, or B. Criminal use.

And I had thought this was on automatic rifles, my bad. I didn't have time to read the whole thread, and must have misread parts.

If only all guns could be banned in America, so we could live in a gun-free utopia like they have in England, where you can't walk down the street without getting mugged and sodomized.

Last time I checked Canada has alot of guns, I think more per person than the US? Not sure about that. All I know is everyone I know who owns guns, has at least 10.

Wow. Right... I knew that. I need to stop posting so late..

Only in the prairies cause a bunch of rednecks live there. The east is much more civilized.

That is if by "civilized" you mean "afraid of what they don't understand", then yes.