[leadmagnet]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by sNiPeRWoLf88</i>
<br />
A new analysis of FBI data has found that from 1998 through 2001, one in five law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I wouldn't take that stat too seriously as far as the type of weapon used to shoot cops goes.  People who take their defense seriously tend to opt for semi-automatic firearms.  It is no surprise that the bad guys tend to as well.

As someone who has personal experience in being attacked by armed assailants, I assure you that my minimum requirements revolve around being equipped with a semi-automatic rifle in caliber .223 or higher with a magazine capacity of at the minimum 10 rounds, preferably more. Such standards provide the minimum necessary penetration, range, speed, and magazine capacity for even coming close to being able to address today's threats which often include the presence of body armor.

Lead

[Firehead]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by delta_echo</i>
He said there was just too much demand for the AK-47, which sells for about $300 and the cheaper $150 knockoff, the SKS -- both of which are imported.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

just to prove whoever wrote this article is a complete moron...the SKS is a completely different rifle...not a $150 knockoff.

[Harley]

All I can say is buy your guns and high cap magazines soon people.  The next ban to come down the pike will surely ban any further sales of even "sporterized" versions and could possibly call for a national turn in of certain firearms.  Scary stuff.

[Raith]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Harley</i>
<br />...could possibly call for a national turn in of certain firearms...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

MOLON LABE

[SHIFTY1944]

From my cold dead hands...I WILL never just hand over my guns!

[Greg]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by SHIFTY1944</i>
<br />From my cold dead hands...I WILL never just hand over my guns!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I've always wondered about our side's understanding of the 2nd ammendment. I mean the whole concept of it being for protection from the government and to have the ability to rebel.

I do agree with this idea and I'm confident that it is what the founding fathers had in mind, but because of the gradual way that the anti-gunners are going at it (nfa->awb->registration->more bans->everything's banned) where do we draw the line? I can sort of see the gun owners of the nation "rising up" if one day everything was legal and the next day the government said to hand over EVERY gun, but the way it is happening, I just can't imagine it being more than a few people here and there.

I also have a big problem personally taking up arms against ATF agents and/or soldiers of our country. We always talk big about never giving up our guns, but how serious are we, really? Afterall, we did let them take away certain guns for the last 10 years. Where do YOU draw the line?

[Firehead]

well, think about it this way: where would we be without guns? we wouldn't have been able to fight for our indepedence, and would still be under the rule of britian. Those anti-gunners fail to realize that the guns they want to remove made us who we are today.

[leakingpen]

no, the way most anti gun advocates think is along the lines of, a public with guns was needed then, but now we have an army, its not needed.  its just like we used to need bakers, millers, blacksmiths, cobblers, ect, but now big business fills the need.  and they tend to have an overwhelming fear of just being blown away.  think about it, if you havent had experience with guns, of the fear.  imagine someone pulling a small box out of thier pocket, pointing it at you, and your dead.  no chance to run, to dodge, you are simply dead in an instant.  thats how most anti gun advocates think about it.

[gixser13]

I think if they ever went door to door taking guns away, It wont be the way you and I think it will be done.
gun owners would be labeled as racsist or terrorist and they would sell it to the rest of the world as good for humanity, I wouldnt be suprised if it was UN troops under the one world goverment act to be the  ones to do the dirty deed,
We are in the End of days guys...........

Sorry my spell check is down

[Stoli]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Firehead</i>
<br />well, think about it this way: where would we be without guns? we wouldn't have been able to fight for our indepedence, and would still be under the rule of britian. Those anti-gunners fail to realize that the guns they want to remove made us who we are today.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Completely true...but, times have changed since then. We're not breaking free from England, & we're not being invaded. We have a military force that can defend itself, & more technological advancments then we can imagine. The days of "get yer gun the british are coming!" are over man. Not everyone needs to own a gun, especially an ar-15 full auto with bayonette & c-mag. In fact, most people shouldnt own a gun like this.

Lets take Paco's collection for instance. Hes got more firepower then some gun stores Ive seen. Think if someone knew about his guns, & decided to take them. They break into his house one night, take the guns, & go on a rampage killing people. How would you feel? Knowing that your weapon was the last thing innocent people saw as they died...

I'm not saying ban guns completely, but I just dont see a reason for anyone to own an arsenal of assault weapons...You want those, get airsoft.

[Under_Fire]

People who say that private militias are outdated are overconfident. Just because we are the most powerful country now doesn't mean we we will be forever. Should we cease to be a superpower or a global power, we need something besides an army for defense.

[Stoli]

So youre saying we should have people out there stocking up on guns, so in case, the US Military gets completely destroyed we wont die? Youve got to be kidding me...If this ever happens, we'll all be dead too buddy. There will be no one left in the world. If the US gets attacked, or we attack anyone else, its nuclear war, & the end of the world...

[KamikazeSM]

Stoli, where do you draw the line with what guns people 'should' be allowed to own?  I think you're missing the point that regardless of what the actual gun is that is being disallowed, it's the government stripping us of a right and invading our privacy even more.  If you have the mentality that one type of gun shouldn't be allowed, then how do you get the anti-gun lobby to stop after that type of gun? All they see is that all guns are bad and they won't stop until they have all our guns.  And since when should we be regulated by what we need?  As a consumer nation, we're not driven by what we need, but rather by what we want.  As Gixser pointed out in the other thread, why does anyone need a car that goes faster than 75mph? You don't need a nice steak restaurant, all you need is a handful of rice and some spam.  See where I'm going with this?  By allowing the mentality that you shouldn't own a certain type of gun because it is more than is necessary for hunting, you're agreeing that we should do away with anything that doesn't serve any purpose greater than necessity.  Besides everything it has to do with the "little" stuff like liberty and freedom and rights, have you thought it might just be fun to shoot?  More people are killed by cars then by guns, but there's nothing stopping people from owning these 3000lb machines of death... in fact terrorists can come here and get them!  If you go by the mentality that a gun is just a tool, then by the same reasoning that states full-auto/assault weapons as overkill, then so is your 4 burner BBQ, your variable RPM table saw, etc.  Sure you can make the case that no one gets killed by BBQs, but the point here is that regardless of something's status as a tool, it should never be limited to necessity, as even tools have a recreational purpose.  And, any such limiting of our pursuit of happiness is not rightfully done by a government meant to serve the needs of the people and composed by the people.

[Stoli]

Well it seems the people dont want you running around with 50cal sniper rifles, & they won. The point of my arguement is that 50cal sniper rifles are just that, for sniping. Sniping includes the tactics of not being seen, or heard by your enemy. Last time I checked, targets at the range didnt have ears or eyes. Unless youre planning on killing somone, you should not have a 50cal. imo...

I've been shooting. Its not fun. I dont see spending my time shooting at a paper target that just sits there fun. Airsoft is a great way to avoid shooting. I want to use assault weapons, but I'm not gonna join the military, so I joined airsoft...

You could argue that anything man made could be construde as a weapon. So friggin what? Were not talking about how many bbq's kill people each year, were talking about banning weapons that are of no use at all other then hunting people. I'm not an anti-gun nut. I believe guns do serve a purpose, but in the right hands. No one should be allowed to walk into Big 5 & order a 50cal, ever...

As for the comment: why do you need a car that goes over 75mph? Good point, you dont. But that doesnt stop the gov't from restricting cars that could be dangerous. Look at the Autobahn. Youre allowed to drive upwards of 200mph. Now look at I-10. If you took those people & put them on the Autobahn, there would be tons of deaths. Were a nation of dumbasses. Most of us shouldnt even drive a car, let alone continue breathing. Youre telling me you want these people to be able to buy assault weapons, & 50 cals?

And I guarantee that if (god forbid) someone on this forum gets killed by an assault weapon, or 50 cal, every single one of you will change your stance, at least on this issue...

Look guys, my point isnt against gun owners, its against stupid people buying them. I know most of you know how to handle a gun, but there are a lot more that dont. We could argue this point til we're blue in the face, but nothings gonna change. You still have your point of view, & I have mine. I'm simply expressing mine, since we all know yours by now...

[delta_echo]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoli</i>
<br />
I've been shooting. Its not fun. I dont see spending my time shooting at a paper target that just sits there fun. Airsoft is a great way to avoid shooting. I want to use assault weapons, but I'm not gonna join the military, so I joined airsoft...

You could argue that anything man made could be construde as a weapon. So friggin what? Were not talking about how many bbq's kill people each year, were talking about banning weapons that are of no use at all other then hunting people. I'm not an anti-gun nut. I believe guns do serve a purpose, but in the right hands. No one should be allowed to walk into Big 5 & order a 50cal, ever...

As for the comment: why do you need a car that goes over 75mph? Good point, you dont. But that doesnt stop the gov't from restricting cars that could be dangerous. Look at the Autobahn. Youre allowed to drive upwards of 200mph. Now look at I-10. If you took those people & put them on the Autobahn, there would be tons of deaths. Were a nation of dumbasses. Most of us shouldnt even drive a car, let alone continue breathing. Youre telling me you want these people to be able to buy assault weapons, & 50 cals?

And I guarantee that if (god forbid) someone on this forum gets killed by an assault weapon, or 50 cal, every single one of you will change your stance, at least on this issue...

Look guys, my point isnt against gun owners, its against stupid people buying them. I know most of you know how to handle a gun, but there are a lot more that dont. We could argue this point til we're blue in the face, but nothings gonna change. You still have your point of view, & I have mine. I'm simply expressing mine, since we all know yours by now...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

All of your arguments are basically hypothetical. That the problem. They don't sell .50 cals at big 5, never have to my knowledge. They idea that we'd all change our minds if someone died by an assault weapon is also an assumption. You can't label a person an "idiot" of anything, driving included, until they, BY THEMSELF prove that they are an idiot. Laws like the .50 cal ban in California are driven by the assumption that EVERYONE is an idiot, so the government must "protect" them and everybody else. Lastly, from what I've seen, most idiots don't have the money to buy something like that as their stupidity plays out in the rest of their lives (ex. job).