Serious Question: Would you be willing to give up semi-automatic guns?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: jupiter869

serious question, how would law abiding citizens giving up their semi-auto weapons save any lives? Please expound on that a bit.

1. You don't know it wouldn't save lives.

2. The law-abiding, nice, quiet citizen until said citizen snaps?

Yeah. Okay.

1, please explain how that might occur.

2, what?

Dude, it's pretty self-explanatory.

originally posted by: XTexan
Who needs a fast car? They damage the environment, animals ,a people.
Who needs a huge house? They damage the environment, animals ,a people.
Who needs computers? They damage the environment, animals ,a people.

The list can go on and on, how far should we go?

I got you beat son, 'I do not practice free speech so therefore you should not'.

a reply to: stosh64

Sure, but I hope you guys are not planning a massacre. You can stop an intruder or rapist with a simple hand gun as well. No need to load an automatic (or semi-automatic) weapon on them.

Well, unless you plan on being attacked by a large team of terrorists, then yes, an automatic rifle will be useful.

Do you plan on being attacked by a large team of terrorists?

originally posted by: veracity
Sure, but I hope you guys are not planning a massacre. You can stop an intruder or rapist with a simple hand gun as well. No need to load an automatic (or semi-automatic) weapon on them.

My handguns ARE semi-automatic.

smh

I'm seeing a LOT of ignorance in this thread about fire arms.

You have to get a very special license to own a "automatic" weapon (machine gun).

The AR-15 is NOT a automatic weapon. It is semi-automatic. Meaning it can only fire 1 round at a time when you pull the trigger.

The AR-15 is also NOT and "assault" weapon. Assault weapons are those that have military specs to them. One of those specs is: changing the rate of fire, from semi-automatic to automatic. The AR-15 can NOT do this. It can only shoot one round at a time. Where as a M16 or M4 can shoot many bullets with one pull of the trigger, or by moving a switch on the gun, fire only a single round, or 3 round burst.

Also: the AR-15 uses a .223 round. This is actually a very weak bullet. My Marlin lever action 360 uses a .30-30 round, and is MUCH more powerful than the .223 round. Assault weapons like the M16 use a 5.56 round and is a lot more powerful than a .223 weapon.

It never ceases to amaze me at how many people rant and rave about gun control, and are completely ignorant about guns in the first place.

As Mark Twain said: Get your facts straight first. Then twist them how you want.

a reply to: network dude

Child

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: stosh64



Do you plan on being attacked by a large team of terrorists?

I am sure the poor people massacred this past weekend did NOT plan on being attacked by a terrorist.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: stosh64

Sure, but I hope you guys are not planning a massacre. You can stop an intruder or rapist with a simple hand gun as well. No need to load an automatic (or semi-automatic) weapon on them.

Well, unless you plan on being attacked by a large team of terrorists, then yes, an automatic rifle will be useful.

Do you plan on being attacked by a large team of terrorists?

Do you believe we should ban the mining of precious metals and oil extraction? Not only would this save at least one human life, it would also save entire ecosystems.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

when I say "handgun" I mean a simple not automatic in any way handgun.
No one will take it away from you, just know you will have to choose a different type of handgun in the future if you plan on it (and if there are stricter gun laws as there should already be).

a reply to: Sillyolme

This simply is not true though.

Meth is banned. So is prostitution, bigamy, racketeering, ballot stuffing, bribery, rape, animal abuse, child abuse...

But they still happen. A lot. Given that guns will still be available regardless of the law, changing the law will make no difference worth a damn, other to remove rights from innocent parties.

a reply to: stosh64

yeah, and he had an automatic (or semi-automatic) rifle which massacred 49 people.
He should not have been able to buy that gun.

a reply to: XTexan

NO,

ITS SIMPLE

Ban any automatic gun purchases.

We have too many MASSACRES in the United States. On average we have 2 (TWO) per year. The chances of one in your city are higher if people have easy access to these guns~!!!!!

a reply to: jupiter869
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
Benjamin Franklin

And the answer is NO. He also used a handgun, so I guess you want that next?

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: stosh64

yeah, and he had an automatic (or semi-automatic) rifle which massacred 49 people.
He should not have been able to buy that gun.

Myself and others are confused. Are you talking about automatic weapons or semi-automatic. Also how are you defining these terms?

a reply to: jupiter869


No

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

when I say "handgun" I mean a simple not automatic in any way handgun.
No one will take it away from you, just know you will have to choose a different type of handgun in the future if you plan on it (and if there are stricter gun laws as there should already be).

There are very few "automatic" handguns out there. As far as semi-auto goes, even a revolver is one round per trigger pull, so I'm not sure what you even mean by this.

a reply to: veracity

No, pick one. Do you mean automatic, or do you mean semi automatic? They are entirely different things. Information before opinion!

a reply to: TrueBrit

But it WILL make a difference if these crazy batSH*t people cannot easily buy them to massacre innocent people?

They will have to go to other means to play out their murders, means that may not massacre the masses!

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: jupiter869
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
Benjamin Franklin

And the answer is NO. He also used a handgun, so I guess you want that next?

The handgun was his suicide backup, dontcha know.

And BTW, I live in NY state. We have the cough "safe" cough act.

It bans certain assault weapons. But the rifle I was allowed to buy is really no different than the one used at the club.

It is semi auto, mine fires 7.62x39 ammo, otherwise known as AK-47 ammo.

I am just not allowed to have certain 'evil looking' attachments on it.

But I guarantee it will fire just as well, even better than any semi auto AK-47 out there that is labeled 'assault'.

The gun laws are a joke. They prevent nothing. It just gives the people in Government something to say they did, when in reality it did NOT do jack $h!t.