• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why would you own an assault rifle?

Would you own an assault Rifle? Why?


  • Total voters
    110
  • Poll closed .
A 'machine gun'...to kill one person. If only the guy in question had been restricted to a .44. :roll: And the weapon you cited hardly qualifies as an 'assault rifle'.

Not to mention they make up no more than 2% of all firearm related violence.
 
Not to mention they make up no more than 2% of all firearm related violence.
I posted several and could post more...hell...pretty much ALL of them. The mass murders in this country typically have nothing to do whatsoever with high magazine capacity. Frankly...high magazine capacity creates an undisciplined and far less effective shooter. But none of that matters. Its comical that people pretend they REAAAALLYY arent after gun bans...and then they are chiming in right along with usual collection of anti-gun morons completely ignoring the facts.
 
I posted several and could post more...hell...pretty much ALL of them. The mass murders in this country typically have nothing to do whatsoever with high magazine capacity. Frankly...high magazine capacity creates an undisciplined and far less effective shooter. But none of that matters. Its comical that people pretend they REAAAALLYY arent after gun bans...and then they are chiming in right along with usual collection of anti-gun morons completely ignoring the facts.

I just see it as more incrimentalism, so don't give em an inch because they'll never stop there.
 
I just see it as more incrimentalism, so don't give em an inch because they'll never stop there.

SCOTUS has made it clear, that Americans have the right to keep and carry firearms.

But they also made it clear, that common-sense regulations upon this right...are Constitutional.

any attempt to take away all guns, or prevent the sale of handguns, or prevent the carry of all handguns, would be tossed out of court
 
Congratulations catawba, you have reached your gold of derailing the thread with pointless twaddle.

he was losing (almost always the case) so he does the squid thing
 
Please tell me where I am "Wrong".

And...it DOES matter that these weapons were designed with the sole purpose of killing humans.

What...pray tell, is a REAL ASSAULT RIFLE?

"Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.Since 1934, there appear to have been at least two homicides committed with legally owned automatic weapons.

One was a murder committed by a law enforcement officer (as opposed to a civilian). On September 15th, 1988, a 13-year veteran of the Dayton, Ohio police department, Patrolman Roger Waller, then 32, used his fully automatic MAC-11 .380 caliber submachine gun to kill a police informant, 52-year-old Lawrence Hileman. Patrolman Waller pleaded guilty in 1990, and he and an accomplice were sentenced to 18 years in prison. The 1986 'ban' on sales of new machine guns does not apply to purchases by law enforcement or government agencies. "

GunCite - Gun Control: Machine Guns

Fully Automatic Weapons remain illegal and are for wannabe-Rambos anyway. Unless you are using it as a portion of a fire and maneuver element, the weapon you want is not a rock-n-roller, but a good semi-auto.
 
Seriously though, would you own an assault rifle? And if so, why?

Of course I would, and it's none of your business as to why. Mind your own beeswax
 
SCOTUS has made it clear, that Americans have the right to keep and carry firearms.

But they also made it clear, that common-sense regulations upon this right...are Constitutional.

any attempt to take away all guns, or prevent the sale of handguns, or prevent the carry of all handguns, would be tossed out of court

And yet, every day some moron will start a new thread about just a little bit of gun control. Already...even thought the "assault rifle" with hi cap mag failed, it didn't "fail" to cause the usual suspects to clamor for bans. Shocking, huh?
 
he was losing (almost always the case) so he does the squid thing

Perhaps someone might be able to direct you to a lawyer to help you interpret the legal definitions I provided.
 
Perhaps someone might be able to direct you to a lawyer to help you interpret the legal definitions I provided.

still spamming idiocy rather than making salient points? when it comes to laws there are two types of individuals

those under military law and those who are civilians and answer in civilian court. The FBI, DEA, ATF, state police, city police county sheriffs all are civilians in terms of what laws apply

so your yapping is just that-yapping
 
still spamming idiocy rather than making salient points? when it comes to laws there are two types of individuals

those under military law and those who are civilians and answer in civilian court. The FBI, DEA, ATF, state police, city police county sheriffs all are civilians in terms of what laws apply

so your yapping is just that-yapping

If you can find an attorney to help you interpret it, here, again are the legal definitions of civilians and police:


Legal definition of police:
"A body sanctioned by local, state, or national government to enforce laws and apprehend those who break them.

The police force as we know it came into being in England in the 1820s when Sir Robert Peel established London's first municipal force. Before that, policing had either been done by volunteers or by soldiers. Police officers in the twenty-first century have technological advantages at their disposal to help them solve crimes, but most rely primarily on training and instinct to do their work.

In the United States, policing was originally done by the "watch system" in which local citizens would go on patrol and look for criminal activity. As cities grew, so did the amount of crime, and it became impossible to control it through volunteers. In the mid-1840s, New York City established the first paid professional police force in the United States. By the end of the nineteenth century, major cities across the nation had their own police forces. Regional police organizations were also established. Federal policing agencies such as the U.S. Park Police (who patrolled national parks), the Postal Inspectors (who helped ensure safe mail delivery) and the Border Patrol (which kept criminals from sneaking into or out of the country) were introduced. In 1905, Pennsylvania established the nation's first state police; other states quickly followed suit."

police legal definition of police. police synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.




Legal definition of civilian: "Civilian is a person not serving in military or a person who does not belong to a particular group or engage in a particular activity. Any activity pursued by an ordinary citizen can be called a civilian pursuit. "

Civilian Pursuits Law & Legal Definition
 
Legal definition of civilian: "Civilian is a person not serving in military or a person who does not belong to a particular group or engage in a particular activity. Any activity pursued by an ordinary citizen can be called a civilian pursuit. "

This is so utterly moronic you should feel embarrassed for yourself.
 
you are wrong claiming that the only purpose is to kill people
Weapons were created foe ONE purpose..Period. ask the military!

dayton cop is a civilian...Cop

wow two cases -the second case is not listed..two more than zero


in Dayton the police will not sign off on Class III stamps. he got the chief LEO consent since he is a cool

the fact remains banning registration and sales of post May 19, 1986 MGs was not due to crime control

Try as you might///no one needs a machine gun...unless they want to kill folk.
 
Try as you might///no one needs a machine gun...unless they want to kill folk.

That is so moronic its not worth spending any effort on

but its consistent with the anti gun drivel we see here constantly
 
Try as you might///no one needs a machine gun...unless they want to kill folk.

A lot of people do own them though, and almost none of them ever kill someone with one. Someone (you?) tried to dig up info and found only two cases of it ever happening. Most people who own them have them for collector's purposes or as a play-toy for shooting up stuff on the range. There is no data to support the notion that people buy machine guns only to kill people... in fact the data is very much against that notion.


And by the way...

"Assault rifle" =/= machine gun
 
A lot of people do own them though, and almost none of them ever kill someone with one. Someone (you?) tried to dig up info and found only two cases of it ever happening. Most people who own them have them for collector's purposes or as a play-toy for shooting up stuff on the range. There is no data to support the notion that people buy machine guns only to kill people... in fact the data is very much against that notion.


And by the way...

"Assault rifle" =/= machine gun

twice a year somewhere near Louisville Ky at a place called KNOB CREEK there is a huge automatic weapons owners convention where massive amounts of ammo is consumed and the public can rent and fire machine guns from small stuff like a Mac 11 to a quad fifty

I don't think anyone has ever been killed or even shot at there

so the clownish crap that the only reason why people "need" automatic weapons is to kill people is just plain clownish
 
twice a year somewhere near Louisville Ky at a place called KNOB CREEK there is a huge automatic weapons owners convention where massive amounts of ammo is consumed and the public can rent and fire machine guns from small stuff like a Mac 11 to a quad fifty

I don't think anyone has ever been killed or even shot at there

so the clownish crap that the only reason why people "need" automatic weapons is to kill people is just plain clownish

I've seen the Knob Creek shoots on TV. Going there and shooting is on my "bucket list."
 
Try as you might///no one needs a machine gun...unless they want to kill folk.

No one needs a Cadillac CTS either. But that isn't what this is about, is it?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060738514 said:
I've seen the Knob Creek shoots on TV. Going there and shooting is on my "bucket list."

years ago I had a client who was a title II manufacturer before the idiotic Hughes Amendment. He had obtained certain de-milled Title II weapons from a scrapper who dealt with the navy and he was going to cosmetically restore the weapons for use in movie sets. Well the CID shows up at his door and claims the weapons (grenade launchers) were not properly de-milled and thus contraband. So he calls me and I review the rules-I agree with the regs and tell my client to give the navy the 1000 dollars worth of scrap but I told the CID guy that the weapons were still un operational

the navy agreed and gave him back the junk and he duly "restored" them sufficiently for film use.

he invited me done to Knob Creek to shoot his 303 Vickers and his Ma Deuce Browning-sadly I was in trial at the time-I then switched to another position at another law office and lost track of the guy but after the Hughes Amendment he went back to being mainly a machinist and fixing broken TItl II stuff rather than making it
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060738522 said:
No one needs a Cadillac CTS either. But that isn't what this is about, is it?

Other than oxygen shelter, water and food the term NEED is sort of silly

I NEED weapons when others think that they should tell me what I need and restrict me to only owning such things
 
This is so utterly moronic you should feel embarrassed for yourself.

That is the legal definition of civilian. If you had read even further, you would have learned that back before the 19th century we actually had civilian volunteers serving as police. By the end of the 19th century however all the civilian forces had been replaced by a professional trained police force.
 
That is the legal definition of civilian. If you had read even further, you would have learned that back before the 19th century we actually had civilian volunteers serving as police. By the end of the 19th century however all the civilian forces had been replaced by a professional trained police force.

you are still clueless-on why this is important in the gun debate
when it comes to law police are civilians as opposed to being in the military. that is why city state and federal law enforcement agencies are called civilian law enforcement


remind me of what you do for a living catawba. I notice no police officers or prosecutors or federal agents have come forward to support you
 
Back
Top Bottom