DiscussMormonism.com

If anyone has been reading the news media lately, it's become clear that there are some serious discussions as to whether assault weapons should be legal or not.

Do any of you feel that the sale of assault weapons should be allowed or banned? Why should they be allowed or why should they be banned?

Personally, I can't see any reason for the average citizen to own an assault weapon.

Thoughts?

Great thread. Let's start with basic definitions. How are we going to define "assault weapon"? Because it already confused the hell out of one guy in another thread.

Kevin Graham wrote:Great thread. Let's start with basic definitions. How are we going to define "assault weapon"? Because it already confused the hell out of one guy in another thread.

I was specifically thinking of AR15s and AK47s or anything along those lines. My personal opinion is that anything that has only one purpose, killing people. But, I'll keep it to those type of weapons that they used to call "trench brooms" during the First World War.

Long guns that are useless for hunting and only good for killing multiple humans at close range during a single episode.

The ban most usually discussed defines one as :

semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.

Even if we leave out the flash suppressor and shroud I think that might be a fair starting point. Any thoughts?

MissTish wrote:The ban most usually discussed defines one as :

semi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.

Even if we leave out the flash suppressor and shroud I think that might be a fair starting point. Any thoughts?

At this point, ANYTHING we can do would be good. We really need to do something. Starting small and working up is much better than doing nothing (which is where we are right now).

Assault weapons are already illegal.... save a few states.

So, what you're actually asking is.... "Should 'scary looking/military looking' guns be banned?"

Those guns those terrorists had were no different in shooting than a Revolver, or any standard handgun....
They BOTH shoot with each pull of the trigger. Are you going to call a revolver an "assault weapon"?

You all have heard my views plenty already.... So I'll just say this.

Here's a few examples of why "assualt weapons" are needed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzMx3Z5EbQQ

There's a reason Cops have switched from Revolvers and similar to High Capacity Semi-Auto Hangguns.
When a gun actually has to be used, often a small # of rounds isn't enough.

Pay special attention to the 3 shooters. The guy in his house had his assault rifle.
Don't you think in that sort of situation you'd want an assault rifle?

Never again will Sikhs allow a murderous shooting spree at a Sikh Gurdwara or Sikh temple !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34ZXkCy01K0

Gursant Singh Khalsa tells his history with assault rifles in "Confessions of an American Sikh"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyeXAVjPtqk

This one's just to laugh about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvYADWpWFr0

Ultimately.....
"Assault weapons" are needed for civilians because one the Founding Fathers understood that personal defense weapons needed to be able to stand against the government.
More importantly..... had people been armed, MANY Genocides would have been prevented.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xyogBWX_Zg

The feds used to have a militia encouragement type of deal on the tens of thousands of warehoused WWII M1-garands. At the time 20 years back or more ... My son and I were in a club that shot AR15's in target competition at 100yrds, and they had a crew of guys that shot 300 yard (open sights) with the 30cal M1G's. We both signed up for the federal program, which the club sponsored (you have to qualify for it via classes/shooting) I got a very nice M1G out of the deal for a small registration fee and shipping. The gun is a total blast to shoot.

You know the term "that rings a bell", well that comes from the WW trenches with US troops shooting the M1G's and the enemy waiting to hear the bell ring before poking their heads up and attacking. It is a gas operated (kind of amazing tech for the era) semi-auto, with a unique 8 round clip that rings like a bell when the last bullet is fired and the clip auto-ejects.






What a glorious piece of functioning history ... 300 yards, open sights 6" patterns.

Quasimodo wrote:At this point, ANYTHING we can do would be good. We really need to do something. Starting small and working up is much better than doing nothing (which is where we are right now).

And that's the kind of blind ignorant thinking that has led to gun bans in most other country's.

Why again do you "need" a flash suppressor banned?
If American's actually have to go to war against it's government or part of it, or an outside country, you're going to WANT a flash suppressor.
Further, let's say it's not even war. What if your family is just attacked by a couple of people, and that flash supressor can help save your life and your family because it's a bit harder for bad guy to track your mussle flash???

Tools exist for a reason.... Mentally healthy people don't ban tools simply because some people abuse them.
I don't see you all wanting to ban cars, which kill far more people and children.
And that's DESPITE all the "licensing" and training required, for something that's entirely a convenience, not actually life and death like a gun is.....

Oh God, just when you thought a decent discussion would ensue, the village idiot takes over.

ldsfaqs wrote:
Ultimately.....
"Assault weapons" are needed for civilians because one the Founding Fathers understood that personal defense weapons needed to be able to stand against the government.

I hear this argument from gun nuts all the time. But it's not 1776 anymore and our armed forces ordnance has gotten much more advanced than flintlock muskets.

So if you're making this argument you need to lay out how you think the small arms in private hands are going to do any good whatsoever against the US military.

Do you think that since there’s X millions of gun owners in this country we can count on a large percentage of them to rise up spontaneously against the Evil Dictator’s government?

And what would be the signal or the trigger to do so? Who’s going to be in charge? It’s a big country, and people are scattered everywhere. The militia groups that are organized probably have nearly as many government informers as they do members.

And what if something big goes down a thousand miles away? Think you’d even get close?

Also, please tell me how hand guns and rifles are supposed to take out MBTs, Tomcat aircraft and on and on. This isn’t Iraq or Afghanistan. There aren’t thousands of spare RPGs and artillery rounds for IEDs lying around.

And when ammo runs short, where does the new supply come from? You may have thousands of rounds saved up, but how many others do? And if you do have ammo and you go down, will your comrades know where you hid it? Will they be able to get to your cache? How many rounds do you think are expended in a typical fire-fight?

What about communications, command and control? Training? Intelligence? Discipline? Food supply? Medical?