No Need for Cheap Semi-Autos????

[96harley]

Was talking to a neighbor tonight. Now this guy has guns, buys and sells a lot of guns, and is a retired troop. Our conversation suddenly shifted when he said, "With all these shootings in the news here lately they're going to take our assault type rifles." My response was, "Not if people band together, communicate with their eleceted officials, and stick together." Then he said we don't need those cheap assault rifles anyway. What is a cheap assault rifle? You know those AK's and SKS rifles. Those aren't cheap and besides not everyone can affort a Colt or some other premium brand. You know me, I am a far right guy. I say we ban no guns. Once they take the rifles the handguns follow. Well we don't need AK's anyway they have no sporting purpose. No gun has a sporting purpose, they were designed to stop an ememy. The hunting issue is adopted by those who don't really understand the second ammendment.

This went on and on. He threw in the gang bangers using semi autos. I countered by telling him criminal intent was the blame, not the gun. I told him I have yet to work a detail where some gang banger used such a firearm. I went on to say every law abiding household in the US should have a semi-auto rifle on hand, supplied by the government. I told him I along with countless other citizens was sick of having to pay for the criminal acts of a few idiot thugs by having our arms taken or listed as banned.

I finally gave it up after arguing my case, and told him I would defend the right of people to own any firearm. I told him once you say it is okay to take one particular gun from the public they will take them all. Then instead of drive by thugs who, by the way ,will still be armed we can also look forward to government appointed thugs shooting us in cold blood.

 

[NateIU10]

Of the TV (I know, I know) reality shows I've seen, the guns pulled off people were mostly revolvers, and mostly stolen anyway.

If a person is of lower income, do they have less of a right to protect themselves or their family? How does a gun kill someone? A person pulls the trigger. Simple as that.

I'm really not a fan of the "I'm pro-gun, but just not that type" arguments. Listen to the Brits, once they know some can be taken, they go for them all.

 

[samrothstein01]

"A wise man once told me, don't argue with fools. People from a distance can't tell who is who."

Sometimes its better to just walk away.....

 

[Seancass]

Clearly, as a recent college grad, i don't get to own firearms. We all know that the poor don't deserve them and will always use them irresponsibly.

I happen to own an SKS, first gun i ever bought. Why? Because it was $110 out the door with ammo. Cheaper than i could get even a .22 and i had a rifle that could cover all of my needs (and even a few of my wants) for the foreseeable future. Had cheap guns like that not been available, I still wouldn't own a center fire rifle. Some of us can't cough up $1k for a rifle just because we want one.

Just kind of sucks some of us don't have money and we don't commit any crimes. Its like we don't have a group.

Maybe rich guys like him would like to pass out AR's to all of us legitmate shooters who also are on budgets! Arn't we in the age of free handouts?

 

[dblagent]

One of my favorite TV shows is the First 48 on A&E I think it is. They follow homicide detectives for the first 48 hours after a homicide call. Obviously you see and get the info on how the person was killed and what with, and usually you find out why in the cases that are solved.

Something I noticed was that a seeming majority of the shootings are with .25, .32, and .380. Many, many revolvers also. I have only seen a couple that were with AKs, and once a Desert Eagle .50. With the .50 the police did not even recognize the shells, they could not believe it and actually went to a gun shop to inquire as to what shot the cartridges. Anyway, it is interesting as I have really never seen an "evil" weapon on the show, never an AR. I feel that it is a pretty accurate cross section of crime seeing what the show is covering and the firearms normally used are not what you hear about everyone wanting to ban.

The only firearm I remember being mentioned tonight was a .32, three casings and one live round found. Shooter caught, sent up for cap murder.

 

[coltaceguy]

We call those kinds of people "fudds"


Avoid them.

 

[NateIU10]

One of my favorite TV shows is the First 48 on A&E I think it is. They follow homicide detectives for the first 48 hours after a homicide call. Obviously you see and get the info on how the person was killed and what with, and usually you find out why in the cases that are solved.

Something I noticed was that a seeming majority of the shootings are with .25, .32, and .380. Many, many revolvers also. I have only seen a couple that were with AKs, and once a Desert Eagle .50. With the .50 the police did not even recognize the shells, they could not believe it and actually went to a gun shop to inquire as to what shot the cartridges. Anyway, it is interesting as I have really never seen an "evil" weapon on the show, never an AR. I feel that it is a pretty accurate cross section of crime seeing what the show is covering and the firearms normally used are not what you hear about everyone wanting to ban.

The only firearm I remember being mentioned tonight was a .32, three casings and one live round found. Shooter caught, sent up for cap murder.

One time I was watching a marathon of it, and 4/6 people on the 3 shows in a row were killed with 22 revolvers . LOTS of 22s

 

[dblagent]

I do remember seeing a pair of Gocks with the 30 round mags thinking about it now, but they were in the dead guys possession and were never used, in the bedroom. Drug house robbery. He had the weapons but they were not handy and he was shot where he stood at the front door.

 

[Lock n Load]

He/ they need to stop watching the liberal media.... I have a few family members affected by that too. One stated that she believes we should be allowed to own and carry a handgun (she knows that I carry daily) but they should outlaw those evil assault rifles!!!

I explained what an Assault Rifle actually is and how full of it the news media is and that she needs to quit watching that trash!!!

My,

 

[kludge]

I have to jump in here and say... We need the "Fudds". We need to keep talking to them. And "educating" them.

Remember, they've been listening to the same crap from the media telling them what to think and how to feel that everyone else does, and unless we put our point of view out there in a simple, non-conforontational way, for them to think about, they'll end up supporting the gun bans.

My wife hated/was afraid of guns when we met. Her trust in my personal character was the start of the change. We saw eye to eye politically and religiously, but it took time and my simple non-confrontational vews of the subject of guns.

13 years later she is a strong believer in the Second Amendment. She is still not a shooter (she shot my .22 revolver for the first time last fall), but she has a handgun license and picked out her own gun a few years ago (a P-11 which she still hasn't fired).

Not everyone has to be a shooter or a gun nut to be a Second Amendment supporter. Just like not everyone needs to be a criminal to be a Fourth Amendment supporter.

It's there when you need it, and that's the reason it's there.

 

[bowhunter_1978]

Clearly, as a recent college grad, i don't get to own firearms. We all know that the poor don't deserve them and will always use them irresponsibly.

Just kinda of curious as to what you meant by this? I am not rich or well to do by any means, does that mean I am going to use my guns irresponsibly? Or is it that because I don't have a degree that I don't deserve my guns? This could get into pretty heated argument if you meant how you said this. Or I could be totally off base here.

 

[hookedonjeep]

AMEN!

AMEN!

Just because we don't need something does not mean that folks should not have a right to own it...... do we really NEED Hummer H1's or H2's rolling around the shopping malls? NO..... but that doesn't mean we don't WANT one, or should be barred from being able to OWN one...... If thugs were killing people with hammers; would the news media be outraged, and call for a civilian ban on hardware stores.... followed with background checks, waiting periods, and carry permits for people who wanted to buy a hammer for legitimate use???


-Ted Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with my Glock-

 

[samrothstein01]

Just kinda of curious as to what you meant by this? I am not rich or well to do by any means, does that mean I am going to use my guns irresponsibly? Or is it that because I don't have a degree that I don't deserve my guns? This could get into pretty heated argument if you meant how you said this. Or I could be totally off base here.

I don't want to speak for him or out of line here, but I believe he was being scarcastic and trying to imply that one doesn't have to be well off in order to enjoy and properly handle firearms, much to your point. I believe he was saying that unfortunately there are people (not smart ones) that believe this is not the case.

 

[Seancass]

Just kinda of curious as to what you meant by this?

samrothstein01 pretty much answered this for me. Like a lot of shooters who are young, just starting out shooting, or otherwise not commiting a lot of money to the sport, I can't afford an expensive rifle. Banning inexpensive, surplus "assault" rifles would be a big hinderence on entry level shooters.

I can break it down some more, but i was just being sarcastic. As a college grad who is unemployed, or just anyone unemployed, I'm not rolling in money. More like rolling in college loan debt(hence why i mentioned college, not as an insult to someone else by any means). The OP said his argument involve banning these cheap, readily available (assault) rifles. I was saying there are other non-rich people out there who like to shoot too besides criminals. I think my whole post will make sence if you read the first part as sarcasm, then read the rest.

 

[bowhunter_1978]

I understand and apologize for misconstruing your comment. It is a bad time in this country and it looks as if the worst is yet to come. I also agree with you that the inexpensive guns are no different than the expensive ones and none of them should be banned, I have been shooting for quite some time now and I still couldn't afford one of those nice "black" rifles, I have had many SKS's and some of them shot better than my buddies (whom got a good chuckle at my expense) higher end weapons.

 

[96harley]

Hookedonjeep....You got it friend.

The Hollywood types and out of touch politicians go about driving cars we only dream about. They go round mouthing irresponsibly against guns and gunownership. They argue that the average guy,who by the way is getting poorer everyday the new gang is in office, doesn't need semi-auto guns of any type. Why, in their misguided opinion the cap and ball or flintlock is all we really need.

My argument to this is; if a 1947 Willy can get you from point A to point B, why do you need a Mercedes, Royles, Cadi, or other luxury car in your garage? My answer: Because this is America and we can. Thus I can own any kind of firearm regardless of whether it cost $100.00 or $30,000.00. I can't afford the $30,000.00 piece of fine full auto, or historical Colt single action but I can afford a gun somewhere in between the aforementioned price range. For the record if you can afford a Ferrari(spl?) go for it.

My heart goes out to the people living in government project housing who are demonized for just thinking about getting a cheap firearm to protect themeslves and their families. Thank God I live in the sticks with all the other ridgerunners, of which I am one.

 

[model67a]

cheap autos

Saying there is not need for cheap auto pistols is like saying there is not need for cheap automobiles. People still need the cheap auto pistol for protection just as well as the cheap automobile. They may not have the finances to own a fine weapon or a fine autombile but they still need protection and still need to get to work. Thank god for the Cobras and old Chevys. stay safe

 

[dburkhead]

I have to jump in here and say... We need the "Fudds". We need to keep talking to them. And "educating" them.

Remember, they've been listening to the same crap from the media telling them what to think and how to feel that everyone else does, and unless we put our point of view out there in a simple, non-conforontational way, for them to think about, they'll end up supporting the gun bans.

My wife hated/was afraid of guns when we met. Her trust in my personal character was the start of the change. We saw eye to eye politically and religiously, but it took time and my simple non-confrontational vews of the subject of guns.

13 years later she is a strong believer in the Second Amendment. She is still not a shooter (she shot my .22 revolver for the first time last fall), but she has a handgun license and picked out her own gun a few years ago (a P-11 which she still hasn't fired).

Not everyone has to be a shooter or a gun nut to be a Second Amendment supporter. Just like not everyone needs to be a criminal to be a Fourth Amendment supporter.

It's there when you need it, and that's the reason it's there.

QFT, and time to repeat something I've said before:

One strategy that has worked very well for anti-gun groups in the past has been "divide and conquer" tell some people (e.g. hunters) that they support your right to get them to stand aside while others rights are restricted. In an effort to help combat that, I've composed the following. Please feel free to pass it around:

First they came for the "assault weapons"
but I didn't speak up because who needs an assault weapon?

Then they came for the Saturday Night Specials,
but I didn't speak up because they're just junk guns.

Then they came for the high capacity magazines,
but I didn't speak up because I only need a few rounds in the tube

Then they came for all the handguns,
but I didn't speak up because I don't use a handgun to hunt

Then they came for the High Powered Sniper Rifles,
but I didn't speak up because I don't use one of those.

When they came for the shotguns and muzzleloaders,
there was no one left to speak up.

Folks, the anti-gun crowd are not going to leave you alone. Just because they aren't going after you today, just because they claim that they support your "right to hunt," don't be fooled. They say we need to compromise, but we've been "compromising" since 1934. The ink isn't even dry on each new "agreement" before thay are talking about the "next step." Each time you fail to support some portion of the community of law-abiding gun owners, you weaken yourself against the time they eventually come after you.

It's time to stop compromising. It's time to get back our rights.

 

[dblagent]

My coworkers at my job are almost all under 30, heck most are even under 25. In talking to them about firearms almost every one of them thought AR15s were full auto. They looked at me like I was crazy when I corrected them. They will say things like "Are you sure!?" Every one of the ones that thought assault rifles should be banned thought that they were full auto. Once I deflated that, they were really really ok with them.

We need some "the more you know" commercials on firearms or something lol.

 

[Bill of Rights]

QFT, and time to repeat something I've said before:

One strategy that has worked very well for anti-gun groups in the past has been "divide and conquer" tell some people (e.g. hunters) that they support your right to get them to stand aside while others rights are restricted. In an effort to help combat that, I've composed the following. Please feel free to pass it around:

First they came for the "assault weapons"
but I didn't speak up because who needs an assault weapon?

Then they came for the Saturday Night Specials,
but I didn't speak up because they're just junk guns.

Then they came for the high capacity magazines,
but I didn't speak up because I only need a few rounds in the tube

Then they came for all the handguns,
but I didn't speak up because I don't use a handgun to hunt

Then they came for the High Powered Sniper Rifles,
but I didn't speak up because I don't use one of those.

When they came for the shotguns and muzzleloaders,
there was no one left to speak up.

Folks, the anti-gun crowd are not going to leave you alone. Just because they aren't going after you today, just because they claim that they support your "right to hunt," don't be fooled. They say we need to compromise, but we've been "compromising" since 1934. The ink isn't even dry on each new "agreement" before thay are talking about the "next step." Each time you fail to support some portion of the community of law-abiding gun owners, you weaken yourself against the time they eventually come after you.

It's time to stop compromising. It's time to get back our rights.

Any time you sit down to negotiate (compromise) something you already have, you've lost.