I personally dont understand what all this carrying on is about. Nobody said anything about "taking away our guns", it's another case of a few media outlets blew it all out of proportion, misrepresented some facts, and then it got carried by the wind and a lot of people now regard it as fact. Like almost anything remotely controversial that happens in the world these days.
If you're banning a firearm, even one YOU don't like or care for, something is being taken away. The right applies to the whole, not just the parts you don't like. I don't like Nazis or KKK, but free speech protects them. It's not "pick and choose."
Look, I grew up around guns, I live in semi-rural Pennsylvania... we have more guns than people I think. My dad introduced me to his pistols when I was like 7 and he taught me safety and respect for the weapon. We went to target practice when I was a kid more times than I can count and I got good with semi-automatic pistols as as well as a few revolvers. I have 10 pistols and 3 rifles in my house at the moment. So trust me, I fully believe in our right to possess fire arms.
The legislation that's currently being worked on will focus on a ban of assault rifles, as well as high volume magazines. Seriously, wtf do you need an AR-15 for? For giggles? Is that worth getting all preachy and activist about? Nobody in the general public needs to have an automatic assault rifle in their gun closet at home. And no sporting goods outlet needs to carry them. And sure as hell nobody needs a high volume magazine. Another part of the bill is going to be a crack down on things like waiting periods, background checks, and I think most importantly of all mental health screenings.
Once again, just because you don't like something doesn't mean no one else should. Assault weapons are a definition for a
semi-automatic weapon with modern military features. Under the law, a 10/22 is an assault weapon if you put a flash suppressor on the barrel. Starting to see how stupid this is? Modern military weapons are ergonomic advancements. At one time the military used single-shots. Then they used bolt-actions, then switched over to semi-autos in WWII, and now they all have full-auto guns. These guns they are trying to ban are no different than WWII rifles or even a Remington 7400 touted as being good for hunting (you realize AR-15s are sold for hunting now right), they're just more ergonomic than their predecessors.
The AR15 is one of the most ergonomic guns ever made, they're easy to use, break apart, clean, and throw back together. You can mount virtually any optic or iron sight. With a vise and a wrench you can swap barrel and calibers. You can hunt coyote with them, switch to 6.8 Rem or 6.5 Grn and hunt deer, or load up a .458 Socom and hunt bear. It is one of the most versatile weapons platforms every made and it's very accurate due to the multi-rotating lug lockup and close tolerances. You can even switch to handgun calibers so you have a pistol and firearm that use the same ammo, or to shoot for less money. They even have .22 conversion kits (I have one).
Also, let me ask you... if police need high capacity magazines and AR15s to protect themselves from the same people were protecting ourselves from, why don't we have the justified need? I mean... they're dealing with the same people who might break into our house or place of work. They aren't fighting war zones.
Another question: If I can hunt with a 10/22 or a Remington 7400, why can't I hunt with an AR-15 with 5rnd magazine? They're all semi-auto, they all (here anyway) have to be limited to 10rnd magazines while hunting. Is it just because you don't like one?
It's far too easy for someone who has led a clean life to snap one day and pass background checks with ease, then go fetch a few different machine guns and in a few days be going to town at the local mall or school.
And people will cry, "This wont solve the issue!" No, but it will help leaps and bounds, it's a start. Steps have to be taken about this, and compromise will be the only avenue to get us to a place where we're all a little safer, and still have our liberties. Part of this is going to be on parents locking up and keeping an eye on their weapons better. Part of this is going to be on kids watching each other at school.
No, banning guns isn't a start. It doesn't help and never will. Most crimes and homicides by an overwhelming percent are committed with handguns. Fewer people die from firearms classified as assault weapons than drown in pools each year. I'm not arguing against anything but your stupidity in trying to think banning stuff will work. They banned Assault Weapons in '94 and guess what... You could still buy them and the large capacity magazines. You just had to pay more for "grandfathered" copies to be legal. It's the most retarded law ever devised and does nothing to help the problem. No one ever tries to ban handguns despite their ease of portability and you can conceal them. You can't easily conceal an AR-15.
This whole thing about "dey takin r guns!!!" is just crazy, do you really think that anyone in government actually believes they could get away with a full on ban on fire arms or anything even close to it? It wont happen in this country, and everyone with half a brain knows it, 75-90% of this country has a strong romance with anything that goes bang. It's a panic that those who have something to lose in this (NRA, Big gun retailers) to try to create a backlash against any kind of meaningful reform. Look back in the past, every time some high profile shooting happens, the NRA, etc stands up and says, "WE MUST DO SOMETHING!" then a discussion starts to take place, and then the same groups stand up and say "THEY'RE GUNNA TAKE OUR GUNS!!! DONT LET EM!!!" and then the whole discussion gets shut down until the next lunatic kills some school children or innocent people in a public place, and it all repeats. Every. Time.
You're not going to lose anything unless you plan on buying assault rifles, or you plan on getting a gun while you're mentally unstable or if for some crazy reason you want to carry a gun with 2,000 rounds in it at once. The Gestapo isnt coming to your house to confiscate your right to defend yourself, you probably wont even lose anything you already owned, you'll be grandfathered in.
Them banning anything at this point is useless and serves no rational purpose. It's a leftist agenda to take benefit of a tragedy to push their agenda. If they actually cared, they'd be just pushing for looking into better background checks or mental screening and that's it. However, I don't see how it could have helped even in Newton. The guy got them from family without permission. He didn't have to buy them (no background check or ban would have fixed this), so what do you propose we do to prevent that?
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin
