HOME | DD
Reddbecca — Where does it say...
Published: 2007-03-06 19:44:52 +0000 UTC; Views: 3103; Favourites: 39; Downloads: 38
Redirect to original
Description
Anti-gunners keep tossing around the tired old claims when referring to what they like to call "assault weapons". They claim "these weapons were meant for killing lots of people very quickly", "these are the weapons that criminals prefer to use", "these weapons have no sporting value", "nobody has any legitimate reason to have one of these", "nobody needs these guns", etc.I'm sick and tired of hearing it. Show me what legislation states that a gun has to possess "sporting value" to be considered legal.
Related content
Comments: 112
HAHAHA! You are awesome man! Point very well made and very educated. No bullshit, no ignorance! AWESOME!
Have a drink on me!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Because simply this.
There is absolutely no-need for fully automatic weapons to shoot and kill animals. In africa one could kill a rhino with a few well placed shots from a bolt action rifle. Hence the difficulty and "sportsmanship" that it posess. Now with the type of gun you are asking to be protected there is no-sportsmanship at all. It is point and burst a few rounds of in rapid sucession there is no real amount of legitimate accuraccy.
It is people like you who are destroying the Hunting world. If you want to weild weapons like that go back to nazi Germany.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
The second weapon is an AR-15, the civilian model. Fixed for semi-automatic firing only.
btw, the M16 and all it's derivatives(including the AR-15) are very accurate weapons.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Since when do we have to kill animals?
if we kill animals but don't need to, we can have "fully automatic" rifles even if we don't need to
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
First off, the whole issue regarding the aspect of hunting is in question here.
Second, the second rifle is NOT a fully automatic weapon, it's a semi-automatic rifle. And whether or not there's any sportsmanship involved isn't an issue, because the Second Amendment isn't about sports, it's about protection. That's just how it is.
Third, I don't hunt. I don't go out and hurt what doesn't seek out to hurt me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
woop de fucking do.
its still a helluva lot faster firing than a bolt action.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So what? When did rate of fire become a disqualifying factor?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
there is obviously a big difference in the amount of innocent school kids you can kill with a bolt action or a machine gun.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Wow, for a guy whose name is "ForceOfReason," your argument is weak.
Schools would be no safer if firearms are banned. This is because criminals have proven that they are unwilling to obey laws that you pass, even gun bans. What, do you really think that if you pass a law banning all assault weapons, then criminals will automatically obey that law?
To quote Fearless Leader from the great 1960s show "Rocky and Bullwinkle:"
"Laws are only for honest people. If you are a crook, you'll sneak in anyway!"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Laws can be enforced. Lack of them obviously cannot.
11 000 gun deaths per year in the united states. 50 in Australia, 50 in Britian, 40 in Japan, 100 in Germany.
Where is unrestricted firearm possession legal? America, and America only.
To quote the 11 000 corpses: "..."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Laws can be enforced. Lack of them obviously cannot."
Yeah, but you cannot ensure that everyone obeys the law. This is why we have criminals you see, they are people who disobey laws. If you make a law that bans firearms, I can guarantee you that criminals are not going to obey that.
Secondly, I challenge you to provide your sources for your statistics. I have found from my research that you are wrong.
The United Kingdom has more violent crime per capita than the United States or Switzerland. Switzerland has the lowest violent crime rate per capita in Europe due to the fact that they legalize firearms and require you to obtain training with them.
You see, an armed populace is harder to victimize than an unarmed populace.
[link]
[link]
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-Thomas Jefferson
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
-George Washington
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-Alexander Hamilton
"Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defence? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defence be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
-Patrick Henry
"To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-George Mason
hat the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms...
-Samuel Adams
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
<= Prev |