Barack Obama vows to pursue gun measures in wake of latest massacre - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Rusty100;36939942]Why does any civilian need an assault weapon[/QUOTE] Why shouldn't they have one?

[QUOTE=Rusty100;36939942]Why does any civilian need an assault weapon[/QUOTE] Why does any civilian have to demonstrate need to own a tool

[QUOTE=Zet;36939908]Do people honestly need something more powerful than a handgun for protection and hunting rifle for hunting? No, they really don't. If you disagree with that I'd suggest getting your head looked at.[/QUOTE] An AR15 is less powerful than a hunting rifle, just sayin'. Assault Weapons work more efficiently for self protection and are fun to shoot.

I don't see why Americans need military grade rifles and such. Pistols and such I can understand, as we have similar laws although they are more stringent, but not heavy weapons like that. Collectors aren't the only people who would be interested buying weapons like this, as the Colorado shooting made clear. 'The right to bear arms' does not necessarily have to cover all arms, the government should limit it.

[QUOTE=Trooper0315;36939927]Automatic guns are already illegal for the most part, and 'Assault weapon' is really just applied to anything in the same general pattern of an assault rifle.[/QUOTE] Actually, in the US, States which are defined as "California Compliant" type states are in the minority. Automatic firearms are, for the most part expensive but legal in the U.S.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;36939963]Why shouldn't they have one?[/QUOTE] because they're extremely efficient killing machines? designed for killing? [QUOTE=Pig;36939977]An AR15 is less powerful than a hunting rifle, just sayin'. Assault Weapons work more efficiently for self protection and are fun to shoot.[/QUOTE] if you want to be needlessly technical yes but the capacity to kill a lot of shit is much higher with an assault rifle than a hunting rifle. there's a reason the military isn't using hunting rifles for the average soldier

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36939841]uh i'm pretty sure they're referring to his high capacity mags which let him fire off more rounds without having to reload[/QUOTE] You mean like the one that the shooter used that jammed and saved lives?

[QUOTE=Milkdairy;36939990]Actually, in the US, States which are defined as "California Compliant" type states are in the minority. Automatic firearms are, for the most part expensive but legal in the U.S.[/QUOTE] yeah, you need some sort of super license that takes forever to get in order to own automatic firearms in the US anyways

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36939958]please tell me you're not seriously comparing needing a computer to needing a literal killing machine[/QUOTE] The guns themselves don't kill people, it's just always these crazy fuckers that go around and do this kind of stuff causing restrictions that any normal person would be fine without. Also, you keep on going on and on about the high-cap magazines when you have no idea how unreliable those things are causing a ton of jams, and how damn fast you can reload an AR in the first place. It's ridiculously simple, drop mag by hitting a button, grab another, put it in, and then hit the slide lock to make the bolt go forward and chamber a new round if one wasn't. That's what? 2 buttons and a hand movement?

[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;36939976]Why does any civilian have to demonstrate need to own a tool[/QUOTE] tell me what is accomplished by owning an assault rifle, if it's such a useful "tool"

I would support stricter regulations but not all out bans, if you try to ban firearms (even just assault rifles) you will just stir up a hornets nest and make it harder to move forward with regulations that could save lives. You need to start progress by making small steps, if you start trying to outright ban things you will only make enemies out of the individuals who might otherwise agree to stricter regulations.

[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;36940011]You mean like the one that the shooter used that jammed and saved lives?[/QUOTE] yes thank god he only got off 60/200 shots before it jammed, its a good thing he wasnt using a 10 or even 30 round mag because then we would have had a REAL massacre in that theatre

[QUOTE=Trooper0315;36940016]The guns themselves don't kill people, it's just always these crazy fuckers that go around and do this kind of stuff causing restrictions that any normal person would be fine without. Also, you keep on going on and on about the high-cap magazines when you have no idea how unreliable those things are causing a ton of jams, and how damn fast you can reload an AR in the first place. It's ridiculously simple, drop mag by hitting a button, grab another, put it in, and then hit the slide lock to make the bolt go forward and chamber a new round if one wasn't. That's what? 2 buttons and a hand movement?[/QUOTE] Guns were created to kill things more efficiently.

To further restrict the usage of ownership of guns, I recommand a very strict background check such as any mental impairments like insanity or anything consider deadly, along with a criminal background check that if people who went to prison or jail over theft, murder, or other serious crimes should not be allowed to own and purchase a gun from local gun stores. This will be the best way to help prevent crimes like public shootings by a substantial amount so we hear less school shootings and other massacre from occurring in our cities.

if high cap mags are so inefficient and useless why do you care so much about them being restricted lmao

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36940000]because they're extremely efficient killing machines? designed for killing if you want to be needlessly technical yes but the capacity to kill a lot of shit is much higher with an assault rifle than a hunting rifle. there's a reason the military isn't using hunting rifles for the average soldier[/QUOTE] You're making the implication that anyone buying a gun is buying it for the sole purpose of killing someone. I'm pretty sure most gun owners don't buy a gun because they [B]want[/B] to [B]or intend[/B] to kill someone.

[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;36940020]tell me what is accomplished by owning an assault rifle, if it's such a useful "tool"[/QUOTE] Target shooting for fun, it's a tad overkill for self-defense but that's no reason to ban it.

[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;36940020]tell me what is accomplished by owning an assault rifle, if it's such a useful "tool"[/QUOTE] Recreational value, for the most part. Not just at you, but it honestly baffles me that people consider the 'you have to justify your hobbies to me even though you've done nothing wrong' argument to be valid.

[QUOTE=Kill001;36940015]yeah, you need some sort of super license that takes forever to get in order to own automatic firearms in the US anyways[/QUOTE] Also the M16's cost like 15 thousand bucks because you can only get ones made before the initial firearms act :v:

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36940000]because they're extremely efficient killing machines? designed for killing? [/QUOTE] So? Not everyone is a gun-crazed maniac running around shooting people with their AR-15. Most people own them for self-defense, occasional hunting, and target shooting.

[QUOTE=Pig;36940033]You're making the implication that anyone buying a gun is buying it for the sole purpose of killing someone. I'm pretty sure most gun owners don't buy a gun because they [B]want[/B] to [B]or intend[/B] to kill someone.[/QUOTE] The occaisional person does, but it's easy enough to get a weapon illegally that banning them serves zero purpose other than restricting people that collect them or enjoy shooting them at the range.

[QUOTE=Milkdairy;36940039]Also the M16's cost like 15 thousand bucks because you can only get ones made before the initial firearms act :v:[/QUOTE] hnng, I would love to own an MG42 some day but it seems wayyy to difficult with all the restrictions on it

[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;36940020]tell me what is accomplished by owning an assault rifle, if it's such a useful "tool"[/QUOTE]Well what good would be banning semi-automatic rifles? I would like to point this out... Most firearm crimes are usually commited with handguns.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;36940041]So? Not everyone is a gun-crazed maniac running around shooting people with their AR-15. Most people own them for self-defense, occasional hunting, and target shooting.[/QUOTE] yup not everyone is, some are though, which is the entire reason this debate exists in the first place. target shooting is fun and i enjoy it but i think finding something else to do on a sunday morning is a fair trade for less gun violence in my country. hunt with a hunting rifle and get a shotgun/pistol for home defense.

[QUOTE=darkedone02;36940031]To further restrict the usage of ownership of guns, I recommand a very strict background check such as any mental impairments like insanity or anything consider deadly[/QUOTE] This is similar to what we have, you have to undergo psychological evaluations before you can own a firearm. There are also rules about varying levels of firearms, lethal weapons can only be purchased if you meet certain criteria, one of which being the necessity of owning a weapon (If you are often in high risk situations; security, politicians, celebrities). If your hobby is to target shoot then you have to get the appropriate license and register every firearm you own. Most normal owners can only buy pistols that fire blanks or other non lethal weapons. Being a member of the Heer (Army), I can have access to a weapon but regulations are very tight with firearms and ammo provided by government.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36940032]if high cap mags are so inefficient and useless why do you care so much about them being restricted lmao[/QUOTE] Yes because we only want them legal so we can use them in our mass murderbabyrapesprees. Not because we'd rather just be left alone and would want a legitimate reason to ban something.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36940062]yup not everyone is, some are though, which is the entire reason this debate exists in the first place. target shooting is fun and i enjoy it but i think finding something else to do on a sunday morning is a fair trade for less gun violence in my country. hunt with a hunting rifle and get a shotgun/pistol for home defense.[/QUOTE] You wouldn't have less gun violence with Semi-Automatic rifles banned or heavily restricted.

[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;36940038]Recreational value, for the most part. Not just at you, but it honestly baffles me that people consider the 'you have to justify your hobbies to me even though you've done nothing wrong' argument to be valid.[/QUOTE] if its recreational, its not much of a tool. so yes, I do believe you have to justify what you do for recreation, ie don't drive at excess speeds just because its fun

[QUOTE=Kopimi;36940062]yup not everyone is, some are though, which is the entire reason this debate exists in the first place. target shooting is fun and i enjoy it but i think finding something else to do on a sunday morning is a fair trade for less gun violence in my country. hunt with a hunting rifle and get a shotgun/pistol for home defense.[/QUOTE] You seem to think banning weapons will get them out of the hands of criminals. This puzzles me.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;36940054]Well what good would be banning semi-automatic rifles? I would like to point this out... Most firearm crimes are usually commited with handguns.[/QUOTE] what a surprise that the cheaper and more accessible weaponry is used more often in the context of mass shootings like the one in aurora, i wonder if maybe rifles are used more often