[MikeD]

I love guns, and the amazing kinetic energy they produce...

That stated can someone please give me a reasonable explanation on why they would need anything that fires a .50 BMG round or any semi automatic rifle (exluding shotguns)?

I want a no BS answer, not some answer stating that not being allowed to possess one is a violation of your personal rights.

Ummm, how's protecting a personal right a BS answer? Why do you need to justify why you need a right to free speech or to freedom of the press?

(Yes, a LOT of dumbasses throw that out there without understanding the intellectual foundations, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong...)

You're also pretty turned around on the idea of rights yourself. The government and society don't give you rights. You have them a priori. The Bill of Rights guarantees that the gov't won't interfere with those rights; it doesn't bestow them upon you.

And what's the beef with semi-auto weapons? Do you mean fully-auto? If not, why do you approve of a semi-auto shotgun, but not a semi-auto 5.56 or 7.62x39 rifle?

 

[JohnE]

Ummm, how's protecting a personal right a BS answer? Why do you need to justify why you need a right to free speech or to freedom of the press?

(Yes, a LOT of dumbasses throw that out there without understanding the intellectual foundations, but it doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong...)

You're also pretty turned around on the idea of rights yourself. The government and society don't give you rights. You have them a priori. The Bill of Rights guarantees that the gov't won't interfere with those rights; it doesn't bestow them upon you.

And what's the beef with semi-auto weapons? Do you mean fully-auto? If not, why do you approve of a semi-auto shotgun, but not a semi-auto 5.56 or 7.62x39 rifle?

But freedom of the press has not advanced as much technologically as firearms have in the past 200 odd years...the interweb has not changed the press as much as the military industrial complex has advanced firearms.

The framers of the Constitution never anticipated automatic weapons, much less ones that could shoot through a school from a mile away with minute of angle accuracy. Nowhere in the B.o.R does it specify what types of arms we are authorized to bear, or not authorized...there is an issue of historical perspective to be considered here. What this country needs is a new Constitutional Convention. Now that would be fun...

And yeah, I think he meant automatic weapons...

 

[MobileChernobyl]

JohnE - Nah i meant automatic as well as semi-automatic rifles. Rifles in specific, the only exception being a shotgun which has a rifled barrel for slugs.

MikeD - I didn't mean for it to be perceived that I think "stating your rights" is a BS answer, I just wanted an intellectual individual's answer, not a repeat of the amendments which I can read whenever I want.

I believe that there really is no need for an individual to own the listed guns... at all. They certainly were not perceived of when the amendment was written, but that's not what I'm concerned about either.

Basically pretend I'm the government, and you are trying to have those guns kept legal, give me reasons why you NEED them. As I said before, if people are getting bent out of shape because a candidate is noted for trying to make these specific weapons illegal, I want to know what really is going through their head when they think they need them, besides the obvious that they want them.

I think the resounding answer, and I guess I'm just asking a question that I want to hear an answer I've already picked out, should be "There is no need for the general public to own these specific weapons."

 

[MikeD]

Mobile, you still don't get it--the people don't need to show the government a need to own a ****ing thing. The GOVERNMENT needs to show a compelling reason to regulate something. I think that reasonable regulation of firearms (like reasonable regulation of speech and free press) is necessary to mitigate the intesection of one person's freedoms with another person's rights. But I think we draw different lines of "reasonable," and you still don't seem to get the point that the onus is not on the American people to prove a need to exercise their rights.

 

[Arutha]

Need a .50Cal? Why do we need cars that do 200mph or a fancy house? Leather in your car, AC?

It's not a matter of need. Any law abiding citizen that owns a fully automatic or whatever should be allowed, they won't be shooting up the local 7 11 with it.

I am sure someone might say they need one for protection from Grizzly bears or something but that wouldn't be the norm and isn't the point.

 

[CKxx]

EDIT: Seems I already replied to this thread a long time ago.

...drivel...

You are more dangerous to gun-owner's rights than the non-gun-owning anti's. You try to ban all the same things they do, using the same (il)logic, but you credential yourself by always adding that you own guns yourself, but none of those icky ones. Good work 'Fudd.

 

[CKxx]

Just my thoughts...I'm voting for Obama =)

Did the Kool-Aide at least taste good?

 

[shocktower]

Why do people need a gun to protect themselves? Unless you already know that your entering a gun fight or going into the wilderness, a gun will most likely get you into more trouble.

When anyone gets attacked at home, on the street, whatever. They're usually surprised, would every citizen have a gun on their hip and ready to shoot? What if you miss? Thats another stray bullet.

If your concerned for your safety, learn some defensive martial arts or some kind of defensive class. Carry a knife, you can only hurt yourself or the criminal. If you live in a crappy neighborhood, get stronger doors, windows and locks.

There are community watches, know your neighborhood and find a way to protect each other.

I don't know, every gun owner i've known has way to many guns and way to powerful. You don't need to take out your whole block. If anything, have 2 handguns for home invasions. One for the bedroom and another for bathroom(panic room).

I think gun lovers should be able to shoot all kinds of guns for sport BUT ONLY at the shooting range where they would have to use the range's guns.


Just my thoughts...I'm voting for Obama =)

You must live at Disney land ,I live in a very rural area ,I go fishing and hunting one time while out fishing 2 tweakers wanted to rob me,they could have killed me ,but for my trusty S&W friend in my back pocket ,it changed their minds ,another time found some guys cruising my street ( they had Arizona plates I live in Oregon),I had to drive a mile just to turn around ,I catch up to them and tell them to leave they did ,and why you ask cause they Know red necks carry ,and will protect their property ,and even if your Bruce fricking Lee a Bullit will stop you,BTW I also use my guns to control preditors and get my 100% guaranteed Oreganic Meat ,Oh yeah I`am voting for Obama ,so we can live with a decent wage ,also maybe we can end this stupid war soon .I approve this message Tom Hightower