This is what I did with my afternoon.

[Mark_T]

Those "right to keep and bear arms" provision were made in another era when the was a real need for them that is no longer true today, and that provision is being used by individuals to own property that, in many cases, is simply inappropriate to be in private hands, just because it's "fun"

Here's an example. Here in Canada, firearms laws are continually being made more restrictive, but when the law changes, 'grandfathering' provisions are written into the new law that basically say that if you legally owned one of these now-prohibited firearms prior to a certain date, you are allowed to keep it and given a special permit, and there are often special conditions attached to its use. That's the back story.

Where I am going with this is that back when I was involved with shooting sports I had the opportunity to fire several legally ownerd fully automatic weapons - Sterling, Sten, Thompson, USAS12 (OMG!!) Uzi... I even got to stand with an UZI in each hand and chatter them both together - tell me that doesn't make you feel like Arnold. My point being that it was an incredibly fun experience and one I would repeat anytime, but I would never ever try to make the case that my fun was so important that these incredibly dangerous weapons should be legalized and put carte blanche into the hands of private citizens who have absolutely no justifiable reason for owning them, other than that they are "fun".

And this is how I feel about assault style rifles. There is no justifiable reason for owning them. "But i like them and they're fun" is not a justifiable reason and certain is not reason to put aside public safety. The fact that they are presently semi-auto is irrelevant. Every one of them can be fairly easily modified to full auto. Combine that with a couple of jungle-clipped banana mags and you have an assault weapon that simply could not be possible with your standard 5-round hunting or target rifle. To me, the need to protect our kids from the occasional whackos that get their hands on these guns completely outweighs personal enjoyment. There's lots of other great hobbies out there - pick one.

[Lobo1186]

Originally Posted by Mark_T

To me, the need to protect our kids from the occasional whackos that get their hands on these guns completely outweighs personal enjoyment.

By that logic, we are focusing on the wrong weapon. If we truly wanted to curb firearm tragedies and murders the handgun would be it.

The issue is that everyone has these motivations which are not bad. To protect posterity to end senseless killing.

No one has the cojones to go after the real killer on the streets, the handgun. Instead they go after the new comer, the one that looks different. In reality even if there was a wholesale ban of even every firearm other than hand guns. retroactive and proactive it would barely dent the murder rate.

Good news is, murder rate is down by several thousand since 2007

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Lobo1186

By that logic, we are focusing on the wrong weapon. If we truly wanted to curb firearm tragedies and murders the handgun would be it.

The issue is that everyone has these motivations which are not bad. To protect posterity to end senseless killing.

No one has the cojones to go after the real killer on the streets, the handgun. Instead they go after the new comer, the one that looks different. In reality even if there was a wholesale ban of even every firearm other than hand guns. retroactive and proactive it would barely dent the murder rate.

Good news is, murder rate is down by several thousand since 2007

Good thing California banned the .50 before a single crime was ever committed in the entire US!

[Mark_T]

Originally Posted by Timco

Good thing California banned the .50 before a single crime was ever committed in the entire US!

There, now that is good, pro-active law-making. Why wait until some nutjob gets his hands on a Browning machine gun and opens up on a shopping mall. There's no need for any private citizen to have a .50

Does that apply to the .50 cal handgun cartridges as well?

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Mark_T

There, now that is good, pro-active law-making. Why wait until some nutjob gets his hands on a Browning machine gun and opens up on a shopping mall. There's no need for any private citizen to have a .50

Does that apply to the .50 cal handgun cartridges as well?

Dude, you drank the Koolaid.....

Biggest "feel good" law ever. It weighs a ton, ammo is scarce, it costs a ton of money, very few can load for it, the scope is as much as a used car, and they banned it before it could do any harm. Dumbest thing I have ever heard, and a total waste of time. But, someone somewhere feels good about it, and that's what counts, not facts.

Just the sound of it...BROWNING MACHINE GUN!!! It's .50 BMG ammo. NOT a full auto Browning Machine Gun. Bolt action, single shot.

[Mark_T]

Originally Posted by Timco

Dude, you drank the Koolaid.....

Biggest "feel good" law ever. It weighs a ton, ammo is scarce, it costs a ton of money, very few can load for it, the scope is as much as a used car, and they banned it before it could do any harm. Dumbest thing I have ever heard, and a total waste of time. But, someone somewhere feels good about it, and that's what counts, not facts.

Just the sound of it...BROWNING MACHINE GUN!!! It's .50 BMG ammo. NOT a full auto Browning Machine Gun. Bolt action, single shot.

Yeah, I know. I was just yanking your chain with that one.

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Mark_T

Yeah, I know. I was just yanking your chain with that one.

And I took that bait.....

[Lobo1186]

Originally Posted by Timco

Dude, you drank the Koolaid.....

Biggest "feel good" law ever. It weighs a ton, ammo is scarce, it costs a ton of money, very few can load for it, the scope is as much as a used car, and they banned it before it could do any harm. Dumbest thing I have ever heard, and a total waste of time. But, someone somewhere feels good about it, and that's what counts, not facts.

Just the sound of it...BROWNING MACHINE GUN!!! It's .50 BMG ammo. NOT a full auto Browning Machine Gun. Bolt action, single shot.

But, Gunny Hathcock shot a child with one from a mile away in vietnam after he mounted his sniper rifle's scope on it... of course it is too dangerous for civilians

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Mark_T

Those "right to keep and bear arms" provision were made in another era when the was a real need for them that is no longer true today, and that provision is being used by individuals to own property that, in many cases, is simply inappropriate to be in private hands, just because it's "fun"

Here's an example. Here in Canada, firearms laws are continually being made more restrictive, but when the law changes, 'grandfathering' provisions are written into the new law that basically say that if you legally owned one of these now-prohibited firearms prior to a certain date, you are allowed to keep it and given a special permit, and there are often special conditions attached to its use. That's the back story.

Where I am going with this is that back when I was involved with shooting sports I had the opportunity to fire several legally ownerd fully automatic weapons - Sterling, Sten, Thompson, USAS12 (OMG!!) Uzi... I even got to stand with an UZI in each hand and chatter them both together - tell me that doesn't make you feel like Arnold. My point being that it was an incredibly fun experience and one I would repeat anytime, but I would never ever try to make the case that my fun was so important that these incredibly dangerous weapons should be legalized and put carte blanche into the hands of private citizens who have absolutely no justifiable reason for owning them, other than that they are "fun".

And this is how I feel about assault style rifles. There is no justifiable reason for owning them. "But i like them and they're fun" is not a justifiable reason and certain is not reason to put aside public safety. The fact that they are presently semi-auto is irrelevant. Every one of them can be fairly easily modified to full auto. Combine that with a couple of jungle-clipped banana mags and you have an assault weapon that simply could not be possible with your standard 5-round hunting or target rifle. To me, the need to protect our kids from the occasional whackos that get their hands on these guns completely outweighs personal enjoyment. There's lots of other great hobbies out there - pick one.

It's not that all of those types of guns shouldn't be in private hands, it;'s that some private hands are not stable or mature enough to own them.

As for the constitution thing, it also allowed for slaves and women could not vote. Yes, another era, but here we are and it still has authority over this issue.

A semi auto AR style gun cannot be easily modified to shoot full auto. Biggest lie around.

BTW, I own a Sterling SMP and an M1 Thompson, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, and a 1927 Thompson (Al Capone era) among other fun guns.

No one said fun was the reason. It;s the constitution that allows me to own them. I need no other reasons.

[Mark_T]

Originally Posted by Timco

It;s the constitution that allows me to own them. I need no other reasons.

And that is the whole problem with the Americans pro-gun group. You are so concerned about your rights that you have completely lost sight of what is right.

[RawleyD]

removed

-RD

[Lobo1186]

Originally Posted by RawleyD

Just to play devil's advocate..
I replaced part of your quote with similar comments about our beloved cars.

And there ARE people out there that make the same remarks about high-powered cars.

A little food for thought. :dance:

I am not going to lie you did a good job making that statement sound like it was originally that way.