View Poll Results: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

Voters
61. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    45 73.77%
  • No

    16 26.23%
Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 180

Thread: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

  1. #31
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Honestly, if you need an AK to hunt......you're a pretty ****** hunter. Spray and pray anyone?

    Furthermore, an AK is really not the best defense weapon in close quarters. You're better off buying a civilian P90. Compact, light, sufficient stopping power against non-armored opponents, easy to sight, easy to shoot.

    As others said, an AK in semi-auto mode is perfectly fine for hunting.

    You diss the AK for self-defense and advocate the P90?? You do realize the 5.7x28 ammo is a high velocity round intended to penetrate body armor? I've fired guns that use that caliber... I don't care for them, think they're overhyped. Tiny slugs with carbide tips travelling at very high velocity are not the way to go for close range self-defense.

    Also the word for a subgun that can't autofire is "oversized pistol". Again, no thanks... a .45 caliber 1911 or Glock would suit me better.

    If I lived in an apartment in the city, I'd probably use a shotgun loaded with #6 shot for home defense, to avoid overpenetration. However I live out in the country, on a farm... a semiauto AK47 is my go-to gun for any major problems. It is more accurate than any pistol at common engagement ranges, and more powerful as well. Overpenetration out here isn't much of an issue.

    I'd hate to have to take a hostage-rescue shot with that warped abomination POS P90.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  2. #32
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Want to tell me how civilians owning automatic weapons will stop a tank division backed with air support?
    Armored vehicles require lots of fuels to travel. Troops need a base.Troops need food. Any vehicle requires fuel. Tanks and other other tracked vehciles can be defeated using anything that can jam on the track gears. I am pretty sure a group of heavily armed civilians can take these things out especially since not all troops are trained for combat.


    The notion that the 2nd amendment exists today to allow us to overthrow the government is lunacy is context of what the military actually has these days.
    Thinking that the 2nd amendment and its intent doesn't apply to today is lunacy.

    Thermobaric weapons easily could wipe out a huge number of civilians with automatic weapons before they even knew what hit them.


    Yet as advanced as our military they are still in Iraq and still in Afghanistan.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #33
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Korimir View Post
    I'm not intimately familiar with insurgency and counterinsurgency strategy, unfortunately. I'm a weapons and tactics guy; I know a lot more about how to do damage than where. But one thing that I have observed about guerrilla warfare, just from watching the news, is that guerrillas are willing to eat a lot more casualties than formal militaries and the occupying power always does far, far more damage to the civilian population than it does to the guerrillas themselves. Guerrilla wars are fought on the field of public opinion and all of the devastating tactics you describe are things that cause horrific amounts of damage to civilians.
    There's no doubt about that, but in terms of destroying a homegrown insurgent force that actually gives a **** about its families, you attack their homes and families. That really doesn't work against Islamists though.

    Remember, we're talking about a country that gets its panties in a bunch when we waste enemy civilians.
    Well, they aren't really civilians then are they? Furthermore, the actual chance of this is pretty much nil. If the Russians couldn't even shoot their own protestors during the Yeltsin Coup, American troops will not either. Hell, if Egyptian forces couldn't bring themselves down to mow down revolutionaries, this whole point of using civilian firearms to overthrow the government is moot as there won't be people to defend the government.

    Well, honestly, I don't care about the 2nd Amendment and I don't approve of loose talk about treason. I just believe that everyone should be as well-armed as they feel they need to be and that the decision to go to war should be as much of a personal decision as it is a collective decision. Who a man takes up arms for or against is between him and his gods.

    Fair enough. I'm inclined to agree with you on this point, but I consider warfare a part of a man's livelihood.
    Some men perhaps.

    My main issue is with the idea that we can absolve ourselves of watching over our government to ensure it doesn't get corrupt on the basis that we can always overthrow it via force. It's kind of like thinking that 500 pounds of cure is a superior choice to 1 nano-gram of prevention. It's clearly the superior choice to ensure that our government doesn't get that corrupt by ensure the people are a check on it in its various processes. But the whole "guns are needed to overthrow the corrupt government" just seems to toss that out the window.

    The AK is a perfectly reasonable hunting rifle in semi-auto mode.
    But that's not what the topic is. Using an AK in automatic is a sign of a real bad hunter.

    Yeah. I wouldn't use a rifle of any kind for home defense. On the other hand, I prefer shotguns to pistols for sheer stopping power.
    Nah. Baseball bat. No need to reload. Plus it's a perfect ambush weapon.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #34
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    As others said, an AK in semi-auto mode is perfectly fine for hunting.
    Too bad that's not the topic here.

    Let's review:

    "Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?"

    No one is discussing the merits of semi-automatic per se.

    You diss the AK for self-defense and advocate the P90?? You do realize the 5.7x28 ammo is a high velocity round intended to penetrate body armor? I've fired guns that use that caliber... I don't care for them, think they're overhyped. Tiny slugs with carbide tips travelling at very high velocity are not the way to go for close range self-defense.
    It's the issue of size in close quarters more than anything else. I agree wholeheartly with Viktyr Korimir that a rifle really isn't the best choice in home defense for the average person.

    If I lived in an apartment in the city, I'd probably use a shotgun loaded with #6 shot for home defense, to avoid overpenetration.
    Or just knock them out with one hit to the head with a baseball bat as they turn the corner. I'd rather give them a concussion then risk actually killing them if I don't have to.

    However I live out in the country, on a farm... a semiauto AK47 is my go-to gun for any major problems. It is more accurate than any pistol at common engagement ranges, and more powerful as well. Overpenetration out here isn't much of an issue.
    Then you don't have the close quarters issue that many of us do.

    I'd hate to have to take a hostage-rescue shot with that warped abomination POS P90.
    That's what the police are for.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  5. #35
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Armored vehicles require lots of fuels to travel. Troops need a base.Troops need food. Any vehicle requires fuel. Tanks and other other tracked vehciles can be defeated using anything that can jam on the track gears. I am pretty sure a group of heavily armed civilians can take these things out especially since not all troops are trained for combat.
    Read the thread. This is already addressed.

    Thinking that the 2nd amendment and its intent doesn't apply to today is lunacy.
    Want to tell me how automatic weapons can deal with thermobaric long range weapons?

    You can't overthrow a superiorly armed enemy that is entrenched without at some point moving to conventional warfare. As much as the US sucked in Vietnam, every time the Communists tried conventional combat they got annihilated. Only after the US left and the North turned to conventional did the South fall. Harassing does not equate to overthrow.

    Yet as advanced as our military they are still in Iraq and still in Afghanistan.
    That's because we choose too. Furthermore, have the governments been overthrown there? No.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #36
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Read the thread. This is already addressed.

    Want to tell me how automatic weapons can deal with thermobaric long range weapons?

    You can't overthrow a superiorly armed enemy that is entrenched without at some point moving to conventional warfare. As much as the US sucked in Vietnam, every time the Communists tried conventional combat they got annihilated. Only after the US left and the North turned to conventional did the South fall. Harassing does not equate to overthrow.
    Not all warfare is fought with just tanks, aircraft and long range weapons. They still need ground troops to back them up. Which is why BFVs even though they are armored and having long range weapons still depend on infantry squads on the ground to wipe enemy ground troops and anything else wanting to wipe out that BFV. The fact that you think it is impossibility does not negate the fact that citizens are constitutionally allowed to have enough fire power to be able to overthrow the government. Automatic weapons are just a piece of what civilians should be allowed to own. Gaddafi seems to be getting his ass handed to him by an inferior force.

    If you look at what an American infantry squad has its not just automatic rifles(M-16s that fire semi-automatic and 3 round burst), they have AT4s or some other similar weapon, they have hand grenades as well as M203 grenade launcher, they have M249 SAWs(now called M249 LMGs) as well as M240B(or M240G depending on branch of service) and various other weapons that make them a threat to other infantry squads and armored vehicles and aircraft.

    That's because we choose too.
    So we choose to let a inferior force keep us in Iraq and Afghanistan for so long?
    Furthermore, have the governments been overthrown there? No
    Those countries would be fine if our troops left those countries even though they have armored vehicles, air craft and long range weapons?
    Last edited by jamesrage; 10-08-11 at 06:07 PM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #37
    Guru
    Jryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    01-12-16 @ 09:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,987
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    If you gave civilians the right to own fully automatic weapons, more innocent police would start dieing in droves.

    I will also add, if you are so paranoid that you need a fully automatic assault rifle to defend yourself, I don't want you to have a gun.
    Last edited by Jryan; 10-08-11 at 06:35 PM. Reason: Further thought

  8. #38
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,335
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Krhazy View Post
    No. These are war weapons, not recreational or self-defense weapons. If you permit AK-47s and M-16s, why not permit people to build their own explosives? Make their own tear gas?

    If a compromise is really necessary, I'd say people should have to be at least 25 and undergo a background check and additionally something along the lines of a character and fitness exam.
    We already permit AKs and m16s. I own an AK.

  9. #39
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Illinois
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,335
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Honestly, if you need an AK to hunt......you're a pretty ****** hunter. Spray and pray anyone?

    Furthermore, an AK is really not the best defense weapon in close quarters. You're better off buying a civilian P90. Compact, light, sufficient stopping power against non-armored opponents, easy to sight, easy to shoot.
    Some AKs come with folding stocks and are great for room to room fighting. The P90 actually doesnt have much stopping power. The 5.7mm bullet is meant to pierce armor pretty well but is pretty weak when it comes down to it.

  10. #40
    Professor
    Luna Tick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,148

    Re: Should an American citizen have the right to own a fully automatic assault rifle?

    Quote Originally Posted by Proud South Korean View Post
    Obviously, you have no experience of firearms.
    Ak-47s are normal assault rifles, they are selective fire (meaning the modes semi-automatic and full automatic are changeable and selectable)
    M-16s are likewise, mostly selective fire
    I'm aware of the different settings. Right now in the United States, citizens are allowed to own assault rifles that are set to only be able to shoot in semiautomatic mode. The exception is if you owned one prior to the 1986 law being passed. That's why the question is about whether Americans should be allowed to own fully automatic ones. Some Americans buy a semiautomatic assault rifle and then convert it into being fully automatic. I understand it's not that difficult to do. However, it's currently illegal.

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Want to tell me how civilians owning automatic weapons will stop a tank division backed with air support? The notion that the 2nd amendment exists today to allow us to overthrow the government is lunacy is context of what the military actually has these days. Thermobaric weapons easily could wipe out a huge number of civilians with automatic weapons before they even knew what hit them.
    I'm inclined to agree with you. I don't think a citizenry owned with automatic assault rifles would stand a chance against the US military. However, it seems to me it's useful for citizens to be armed in the event of a hostile invasion. If we were occupied by a foreign army, citizens armed with automatic AK-47s and similar rifles could cause a lot of nuisance for the invaders until the US military arrives.

Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •