I can't think of one reason a person would need an assault weapon in their home.

 

 

Define assault weapon.

They can have my AR when they pry it from my cold dead fingers

 

I'll be there defending you and your cold dead fingers Rocket.

I can't think of one reason a person would need an assault weapon in their home.

What are you calling an assault weapon?

Let's look at some more banning attempts.

 

Is banning assault rifles a desire to get rid of assault rifles?

 

Or is it the first step in an agenda to ban guns completely?

 

 

IMO the agenda of gun control people is to bans gun entirely.

:thumb: I agree. Their agenda is to ban firearms.

 

 

RTS, I am interesting in learning about what types of regulations you are in favor of, as regards guns. Do you believe in any type of gun being banned? What other regulations do you see?

 

They are trying to also ban the sell of ammunition. This past year 13 states have considered schemes to require that ammunition be serialized with registration numbers and registered in the owners name and kept in a computerized database.

Most of the bills would also require gun owners to forfeit any non-coded ammunition they have in possession. These bills include no compensation for the loss of millions of rounds of privately owned citizens.

I guess that I am not being clear.

 

Let's say we wiped all regulations off the books and wanted to start from scratch. What do we really want to control? Should everyone be allowed all types of firearms?

 

I have not thought about these things as much as some of the rest of you. I have been happy to own pistols and rifles and for my friends that hunt being able to own more powerful rifles and shotguns. What do I really need to know about and be aware of?

Edited July 20, 200818 yr by True blue (and gold)

I can't think of one reason a person would need an assault weapon in their home.

 

I have an AR-15 and in my opinion it is an ideal weapon for home defense. For several reasons I think it is worlds better than a handgun.

I guess that I am not being clear.

 

Let's say we wiped all regulations off the books and wanted to start from scratch. What do we really want to control? Should everyone be allowed all types of firearms?

 

I have not thought about these things as much as some of the rest of you. I have been happy to own pistols and rifles and for my friends that hunt being able to work more powerful rifles and shotguns. What do I really need to know about and be aware of?

 

I may not know what you are getting at but wiping al regulations off the books and starting from scratch is imo exactly what all the gun control people want to do.

They want to wipe the 2nd amendment to the constitution off of the books then re write it to suit their anti gun / anti Americam agenda and take the rights that we all are entitled to off of the constitution. I personally do not have any desire to own and assault weapon but I will defend the right of any law abiding citizen to own one if they so choose.

Another thing is that some years ago (under the Clinton admin.) these anti gun wonders defined an assault/fully auto matic weapon to include a semi auto rifle or shotgun commonly used for hunting.

These people are after ALL guns and ALL ammo, don't let their sugar coated "do good" agenda fool anyone. As I said in another post, they want a complete ban of all guns and all of our freedoms and rights. They would love nothing better than a Governmant Contolled Society in every way.

We imo cannot give these people anything at all, they will not stop and will keep going untill all guns are gone.

I may not know what you are getting at but wiping al regulations off the books and starting from scratch is imo exactly what all the gun control people want to do.

They want to wipe the 2nd amendment to the constitution off of the books then re write it to suit their anti gun / anti Americam agenda and take the rights that we all are entitled to off of the constitution. I personally do not have any desire to own and assault weapon but I will defend the right of any law abiding citizen to own one if they so choose.

Another thing is that some years ago (under the Clinton admin.) these anti gun wonders defined an assault/fully auto matic weapon to include a semi auto rifle or shotgun commonly used for hunting.

These people are after ALL guns and ALL ammo, don't let their sugar coated "do good" agenda fool anyone. As I said in another post, they want a complete ban of all guns and all of our freedoms and rights. They would love nothing better than a Governmant Contolled Society in every way.

We imo cannot give these people anything at all, they will not stop and will keep going untill all guns are gone.

 

I am only trying to learn about what 2nd amendment proponents feel are appropriate regulations on firearms, if any. There is no hidden agenda.

I am only trying to learn about what 2nd amendment proponents feel are appropriate regulations on firearms, if any. There is no hidden agenda.

 

I wasn't saying that you had a hidden agenda TBG, I didn't mean my post to sound like that. I was saying that all of these anti gun lawmakers in office and other radical liberals like them have a hidden agenda.

 

As for your question, my opinion is that no new regulations,restrictions on firearms are needed. Any law abiding citizen should not have their right to own any firearm they choose taken away. We already have more laws on the books right now than anyone can name that are not being enforced.

I wasn't saying that you had a hidden agenda TBG, I didn't mean my post to sound like that. I was saying that all of these anti gun lawmakers in office and other radical liberals like them have a hidden agenda.

 

As for your question, my opinion is that no new regulations,restrictions on firearms are needed. Any law abiding citizen should not have their right to own any firearm they choose taken away. We already have more laws on the books right now than anyone can name that are not being enforced.

 

I hear the term "law abiding citizen" a lot in these discussions. RTS has said that he favors revocation of the 2nd Amendment right for persons convicted of violent crimes, for example.

 

So, what does "law abiding citizen" mean? By way of example, does someone with a slew of unpaid parking tickets qualify as law abiding? At the other extreme, if someone is convicted of treason and does his 14+ years or whatever it is, does he get his gun?

What are you calling an assault weapon?

The only experience I have with one is the M-16 that I used in the Marine Corps.

 

I have an AR-15 and in my opinion it is an ideal weapon for home defense. For several reasons I think it is worlds better than a handgun.

I guess for sure stopping power you are right.

I have an AR-15 and in my opinion it is an ideal weapon for home defense. For several reasons I think it is worlds better than a handgun.

 

:thumb:

I have an AR-15 and in my opinion it is an ideal weapon for home defense. For several reasons I think it is worlds better than a handgun.

 

 

Is yours full size or with a telescoping stock? Me, I'll stick with my paratrooper SKS until I get my 1911. Rather have a larger diameter bullet. Unfortunately the Nagant is a bit too long for use in a house.

I have an AR-15 and in my opinion it is an ideal weapon for home defense. For several reasons I think it is worlds better than a handgun.

 

It's probably more accurate and shoots at longer distances. That's two reasons I can think of off the top of my head.

I hear the term "law abiding citizen" a lot in these discussions. RTS has said that he favors revocation of the 2nd Amendment right for persons convicted of violent crimes, for example.

 

So, what does "law abiding citizen" mean? By way of example, does someone with a slew of unpaid parking tickets qualify as law abiding? At the other extreme, if someone is convicted of treason and does his 14+ years or whatever it is, does he get his gun?

 

I believe that RTS gave an answer to this question earlier in the thread. What I mean by law abiding citizen (or non law abiding citizen in this case) would be that anyone that has been convicted of a violent crime or any other crime using a gun should not have the right to own a firearm.