Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Why would anyone need an assault rifle?


Assault Rifles  

441 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

to take out modern superanimals, like the flying squirrel or the electric eel.

Worth it even if it saves only one life imo.

You guys crack me up.  Nothing is going to happen to anyone's guns, people.  A guy walked into a school and  killed twenty children and nothing changed about who can own a gun.  Why would someone shoo

2 minutes ago, [icon] said:

Here's where I say "And banning guns will do that" and you say "yes" and I say "Tell me about the war on drugs, or tell me about banning legal guns when this shooting was largely carried out by one that was banned"... and you say "So you think we should do nothing? We have to do something"... and I say "Never mistake activity with productivity' and then point out that I'm okay with common sense regulations that directly impact the problem without impacting the rights of law abiding citizens"... then you say I shouldn't have those rights.... and then we are at the typical dead end. :shrug:

I'm fine with the dead end. The 2nd Amendment has passed its time. I don't care about any of your reasons for keeping it. And even if it doesn't mean every gun is gone. It sure as hell will cut down on the number that go out to the crazies in the future.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Christo said:

So you fight the first group off and more come with more weapons. Oops.

Possible.  Even probable.

I'm not one for just quitting though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the government came and said we are cutting you down to a revolver, a bolt action, and a shotgun I would be generally ok with it.  

There have been at most 2 times I've ever needed the semi auto for any real practical purpose and even those were debateable.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Christo said:

I'm fine with the dead end. The 2nd Amendment has passed its time. I don't care about any of your reasons for keeping it. And even if it doesn't mean every gun is gone. It sure as hell will cut down on the number that go out to the crazies in the future.

Hardly a settled matter. 

Or should I just respond with :lmao:  ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, [icon] said:

I don't think society is about to collapse, but I'm prepared to protect my family in the event of loss of services and civil unrest in the event of a disaster (ie new madrid fault 100 year quake hitting). 

I don't think my house is going to be destroyed by a tornado, but I have an insurance policy for that, too. 

Again... if you are confident in the ability of government and law enforcement to keep you safe in the event of natural disaster, that's cool. I am not telling you you can't settle for that as something that gives you peace of mind. You do you. I'll do me. Everyone's happy :thumbup: 

Except for the ones thst believe your arsenal is a threat, or an opportunity

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Christo said:

I'm fine with the dead end. The 2nd Amendment has passed its time. I don't care about any of your reasons for keeping it. And even if it doesn't mean every gun is gone. It sure as hell will cut down on the number that go out to the crazies in the future.

I can entertain many arguments that the second amendment is anachronistic in this day and age.  I am very willing to discuss its repeal or replacement.  what I cannot support, and this does not go to your argument but to that of others frequently made, is that we should have the Courts interpret it away, or congress legislate it away. 
There is a process for amending the Constitution.  I want that followed.  I prefer rule of law over sophistries.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I can entertain many arguments that the second amendment is anachronistic in this day and age.  I am very willing to discuss its repeal or replacement.  what I cannot support, and this does not go to your argument but to that of others frequently made, is that we should have the Courts interpret it away, or congress legislate it away. 
There is a process for amending the Constitution.  I want that followed.  I prefer rule of law over sophistries.

How would you amend it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, WhatDoIKnow said:

Maybe I've asked this in this thread already.  If they were required to be colored pink, would as many be sold?

I mean, the color doesn't affect the function of the weapon.

Nor would it affect the thing I thought we were trying to stop here. 

If your agenda is to verbally attack and mock those who choose to own guns. You're exposing yourself as someone who doesn't actually care about the senseless tragedy... but are simply concerned with punitive measures against those who think differently than you. IMO we should probably focus on the direct causes of these senseless tragedies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I can entertain many arguments that the second amendment is anachronistic in this day and age.  I am very willing to discuss its repeal or replacement.  what I cannot support, and this does not go to your argument but to that of others frequently made, is that we should have the Courts interpret it away, or congress legislate it away. 
There is a process for amending the Constitution.  I want that followed.  I prefer rule of law over sophistries.

I have no problem with that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Christo said:

You can do what you want. But the status quo isn't working.

I am less confident than you that ridding a violent and sick society of guns will reduce violence.  Tool users will find other very effective tools.  That said, maybe our national fascination with gunplay has desensitized us, so perhaps it will be more effective than I anticipate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Christo said:

I'm fine with the dead end. The 2nd Amendment has passed its time. I don't care about any of your reasons for keeping it. And even if it doesn't mean every gun is gone. It sure as hell will cut down on the number that go out to the crazies in the future.

Again, that is your opinion. I respect your right to have it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Christo said:

You can do what you want. But the status quo isn't working.

This is highly subjective and depends on what you are referring to.  I'd assume you are referring to the recent event, but I can't really be sure.

However, yesterday's events are the sad consequence of increased freedom in multiple ways.  There are many things our government could have done to stop this shooting.  I think all of them are too great a price to pay to guaranty something like this never happens.  It's a horrible tragedy and I wish it didn't have to happen, but I'd rather not live with a constant eye in the sky or an unchecked government watching, controlling or manipulating the details of our lives.  Guns are a part of that, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, msommer said:

Except for the ones thst believe your arsenal is a threat, or an opportunity

There's a reason burglars usually head next door when they hear a dog barking. I don't have to be a hard target... I just have to be harder than your house next door. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, [icon] said:

I'd rock this in a pinch. Beats strong words, fist waiving and a 8" chef's knife. 

If I had that weapon in a societal collapse situation I would eliminate the pink.  The color draws attention and would compromise your cover.  Easy enough to do though with spray paint and a bit of burlap.  Would I buy that or use it if the law required that color, sure, if I thought I needed that weapon the color would be no impediment.  In fact I believe several NFL players tried to pick those up for breast cancer month.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, [icon] said:

 

Certainly your right to have those perceptions. I respectfully disagree. Thankfully, at least currently, the law is on my side. 

For now. It's high time we revise the outdated 2nd amendment. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Why do we need sports cars that can go 120 mph? 

Because sports cars aren’t designed for murdering large amounts of people as quickly and efficiently as possible?

This is actually way easier than you guys make it out to be. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Otis said:

Because sports cars aren’t designed for murdering large amounts of people as quickly and efficiently as possible?

This is actually way easier than you guys make it out to be. 

So, an assault rifle by itself murders people? That's like saying a pack of cigarettes sitting on the table gives people lung cancer. There are millions of guns in this country. The question was, why do we need one that shoots 50 rounds as quickly as possible? The fact that there aren't millions of mass shootings every day just proves that the gun isn't the problem. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KCitons said:

So, an assault rifle by itself murders people? That's like saying a pack of cigarettes sitting on the table gives people lung cancer. There are millions of guns in this country. The question was, why do we need one that shoots 50 rounds as quickly as possible? The fact that there aren't millions of mass shootings every day just proves that the gun isn't the problem. 

 

I know 58 people who'd beg to differ today.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, [icon] said:

There's a reason burglars usually head next door when they hear a dog barking. I don't have to be a hard target... I just have to be harder than your house next door. 

Yeah and an ADT sign usually does the trick as well.  They also go without the greatly increased risk of death to you and your family that owning a gun creates - https://www.minnpost.com/second-opinion/2012/12/health-risk-having-gun-home

 

I wish people would get away from the line that guns make you safer.  A damn Dog and a 20 dollar sign of amazon actually do that.    

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Christo said:

Good. Smoke up. Not the issue being discussed here.

I was making parallels to other things we have in this country that kill people. Fast cars, cigarettes, unhealthy foods. It takes human interaction, usually in excess to make these things deadly. Assault rifles are no different. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KCitons said:

I was making parallels to other things we have in this country that kill people. Fast cars, cigarettes, unhealthy foods. It takes human interaction, usually in excess to make these things deadly. Assault rifles are no different. 

They aren't equivalent. So no reason to discuss them.

Edited by Christo
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BigSteelThrill said:

:lmao: oh dear god.

Praying might help. 

Not sure what's funny though. If you want to ban assault rifles because they kill a large amount of people, why not ban cigarettes? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, KCitons said:

The fact that there aren't millions of mass shootings every day just proves that the gun isn't the problem.

Amen brother. The fact there aren't millions of murders every day just proves that murders aren't a problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Why do you want to ban assault rifles?

Exactly the same reason I don't like people having access-to, or carrying, or enjoying sports competitions based on grenades or RPGs.

 

*for the record - I am pro 2nd amendment. Just as I believe in God.  ***But its very easy to play devils advocate against such things from a logical fact-based standpoint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BigSteelThrill said:

People can simply walk away from other smokers.  Not true of guns.

This is true. I still think the problem lies with people, not guns. If the desire is there to kill a large number of people, they will find a way. 

The thread asks why does someone need an assault rifle. There are millions of assault rifles in this country and very few of them are used for mass murders. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...