So we can leave nuclear arms free for all too, and only prosecute if anyone uses them in an unsafe manner. Does that sound reasonable to you?
Are they in common use for lawful purposes? Can a person even own the raw materials to make one? Again, nukes aren't 2A issue.
These guns you are talking about are not designed for home safety nor for hunting. They are designed to protect against mobs and riots in the street and battlefield situations. The average person has as much business having these for home defense as they do a nuke.
The first semiautomatic rifle in the US was made in 1903, in .22 LR. It wasn't designed as military rifle. The first semiautomatic centerfire rifle in the US was the Remington Model 8, designed for hunting. The .224 caliber bullet was first used in the .220 Swift, in 1935, for hunting. The .223 Remington was based on the .222 Remington, a hunting cartridge. The Remington model 760, a hunting rifle, was sold to civilians before the M16 was used by the US military. The Remington Model 8 used a removable box magazine that held up to 15 rounds.
There is nothing unique to the AR-15, other than the bayonet lug, that wasn't used in a hunting rifle before ever being used in an M16 or AR-15.
Common legal uses for AR-15s and similar firearms:
1. Long distance shooting.
Service Rifle - Civilian Marksmanship ProgramCivilian Marksmanship Program
2. Competition -
News | 3 Gun Nation
3. Practice – for long distance or competition
4. Plinking/recreational shooting – cheapest centerfire ammo, low recoil, adaptable frame.
5. Varmint hunting -
.204 Ruger
6. Big game hunting, in the proper caliber and legal magazine. -
Finally, 4 AR-Style Rifles Chambered for Big Game Hunting | Field & Stream
7. Self-defense. -
Ultimate .300 Blackout Ammo Test - Shooting Times
Look, I know you are big gun enthusiast and collector and have encyclopedic knowledge of firearms. No one is out to get your guns. But this paranoia about losing high capacity clips and waiting an extra day to buy a gun, or regulating some of the crazier kinds of bullets out there, just seems very odd. If you are not on some mental health or terrorist watchlist, or not interested in specifically being free to buy cop killer bullets, why such intransigence? It doesn't make sense. It just seems like paranoia. And it's putting the public health in danger.
I already own guns. Why should I have to wait a day, or 10 days, or up to a month with some current laws? The government is not empowered to restrict the number of rounds that a magazine can hold, nor would it make any appreciable difference to the crime rate.
What are "cop killer" bullets? You do know that armor piercing bullets for handguns are already illegal, right?
And don't resort to the usual "the only reason you are harassing gun owners is because liberals hate the way gun owners vote politically." That's a cop out of the debate.
No, you're pushing for laws that won't work and aren't Constitutional because your understanding of guns and the law is lacking.