TallBill
Lifer
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
So what is the legitimate reason for owning a full auto assault weapon?
The majority of gun crimes in america are committed with $100 piece-of-shit handguns that get tossed.
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
So what is the legitimate reason for owning a full auto assault weapon?
Originally posted by: Brian48
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
So what is the legitimate reason for owning a full auto assault weapon?
Normal citizens cannot get them. Military, law enforcement, and class 3 licensee (usually security firms) are the only people allowed to possess full auto firearms. I'd say that's pretty darn legitimate.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
The Princeof Wands does know all that much about firearms if he says " the weapon is irrelevant because absolutely any semi-auto could do basically the same thing, and any shotgun would have had the same end result, and probably any old style revolver for that matter. "
Which is basically incorrect in most cases. Depending on the construction of the walls and doors, a shot gun would have lost most of its energy punching a hole through the walls and doors, revolver bullets are are made of soft lead, would have greatly expanded in diameter in the process of penetration of walls or doors, and even large magnum pistols contain only a fraction of the energy packed by a AK-47 bullet. Certain non assault rifle legitimate hunting high powered rifles can develop more muzzle energy, but they are usually only loaded with expanding type bullets, are usually bolt action, and have magazines seldom containing more than five rounds.
And due to the wonders of military surplus, there are ready supplies of non expanding military ammunition in case lots of a 1000 that can go through walls and doors without losing much energy. In short, this AK-47 was not your typical firearm, it was ideally suited for what happened here, its worthless and illegal as a hunting rifle, but almost an accident waiting to happen when placed in the hands of a nut. This entire incident is a compelling reason to ban ALL weapons of that type. They belong in military arsenals under lock and key, not in the hands of the general public. Even if the owner is "responsible", too often the responsible owner gets robbed and they wind up in the hands of criminals.
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
This isn't about banning guns so much as it is doing SOMETHING to keep guns away from ABSOLUTE FUCKIN MORONS.
Really, can you be against banning morons from having guns? Somebody's kid is dead because AN ABSOLUTE MORON was allowed to have a gun.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
This isn't about banning guns so much as it is doing SOMETHING to keep guns away from ABSOLUTE FUCKIN MORONS.
Really, can you be against banning morons from having guns? Somebody's kid is dead because AN ABSOLUTE MORON was allowed to have a gun.
So, is it a case of stronger gun laws or developing some means to reduce the number of illegal guns?
No, this is not about banning all guns, this is about banning one particular type gun that is legitimately useless, but makes crimes of this nature into crimes of this nature on steroids. If the nut in question used any other type of firearm, the probability of this resulting in a single death would have been greatly lower. Worse yet, if the nut in question would have tried to flee, he could have been in a position of rapid fire endangering everyone in a mile or better radius. And able to fire perhaps another thousand rounds or better before he was subdued, outgunning the police in the process.
A shotgun or a pistol would reduce that effective kill radius to no more than a hundred yards, and while even a legitimate hunting high power rifle would preserve the effective danger radius, it would not be able to match the assault rifles rate of fire, magazine size, and few would be able to afford the buy enough ammunition in those large lot sizes.
As a legitimate firearms owner and a hunter, I do know a thing or two about firearms. I would never ever consider wasting a penny on the purchase of an assault weapon, and I think the NRA is my greatest enemy in terms of preserving my rights to own firearms. I despise the NRA as the lobbying monstrosity they have become, as far as I am concerned, champions of criminals, thugs, the criminally insane, as they spread a message of uncompromising paranoia. The NRA has long gone past being anything but the problem.
Originally posted by: between
Originally posted by: venkman
It's FREAKIN' HALLOWEEN and he is SURPRISED by a knock on his DOOR? Is he pants on head retarded?
Maybe he was just really paranoid or mentally ill, as another poster has suggested
If he genuinely believed he was under attack, then his behaviour almost makes sense. he was defending himself.
Of course, if he only had a knife instead of a gun, he would have had to open the door and would have seen it was only a kid. the problem lies mostly with the easy availability of guns in America.
I can't help but compare this situation to that Texan nutcase who shot the burglar (of his neighbour's house) in the back. That guy wasn't even charged with manslaughter let alone murder... many people here seemed to be happy with that outcome. But let's be honest, what's more heinous - shooting someone in the back (!), or shooting through a door because you are paranoid and think you are being attacked?
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Zenervolt notes, " The AK-47 is not "worthless and illegal as a hunting rifle", as there are many widely-available loadings for its calibre with expanding bullets that are legal for hunting. In fact, a person can easily buy non-expanding bullets for other much more powerful cartridges such as the 30-30, the .308 Winchester, and the .30-06."
What we have here is a pretty short list of readily available hunting cartridges, but why the hell Zemervolt comes up with the 30-30 is a total mystery to me. The .308 Winchester is simply the commercial version of the standard US past round generation military round, which in turn replaced the 30-06 which was our standard military ordinance in WW1 and two. the main reason the 30-06 was replaced by the .308 Winchester was the fact the 30-06 is too long to be ideal for use in automatic weapons. As for the 30-30, its never been a standard military cartridge, so no ready supply of military surplus cheap ammunition exists. And while a hand loader can load bullets of any type into any round cartridge on the planet, I dare say I could purchase even armor piercing bullets military surplus dirt cheap for that AK-47 I would not buy or own.
Its the ready supply of very cheap ammunition, the high rate of fire, the large magazines, that make these idiot weapons of choice. Our current Ar-15 .223 cartridge is also a danger, they certainly lack the penetrating power of a 30-06, but they were the weapon of choice of the DC snipers. Easily lethal and accurate at 300 yards. But not very good at penetrating walls and doors. And absolutely illegal to use on even deer sized animals in almost all 50 States in the union.
Get a clue, these people are seldom firearms knowledgeable people, but when too much cheap ammunition meets available megafire power idiots , too many accidents are inevitable. Ban all assault weapons with magazine capacities over 5, criminalize the sale or manufacture or any larger magazine capacity, and restrict purchases of large lots of military surplus ammo, and the world will be in a better place.
As it is, I as blood thirsty hunter, I only want to assassinate Bambi, kill pheasants and Quail, and fair play, give Dan Quail a head start.
Originally posted by: Brian48
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
So what is the legitimate reason for owning a full auto assault weapon?
Normal citizens cannot get them. Military, law enforcement, and class 3 licensee (usually security firms) are the only people allowed to possess full auto firearms. I'd say that's pretty darn legitimate.
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
This is why guns should be banned.
Too protect yourself against burglars who ring the doorbell you silly!!!Originally posted by: Engineer
![]()
I don't know why anyone (other than military or certain police) needs fully automatic weapons.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Too protect yourself against burglars who ring the doorbell you silly!!!Originally posted by: Engineer
![]()
I don't know why anyone (other than military or certain police) needs fully automatic weapons.
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Too protect yourself against burglars who ring the doorbell you silly!!!Originally posted by: Engineer
![]()
I don't know why anyone (other than military or certain police) needs fully automatic weapons.
Has it been established this nut had a full-automatic?
Niven has a great imagination and an easy style. His books with pournelle are pretty good also.Originally posted by: SagaLore
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
No, just why most felons should be killed.
In Larry Niven's SF stories felons have their organs harvested so something good can be done with their wasted lives. We just need to solve tissue rejection problems and find cures for the felons' STDs (AIDS, hepatitus) and we can start up the program.
Another Larry Niven fan. 🙂 The Ringworld series was fun, but most of his other books are awesome as well...
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
This is why guns should be banned.
Originally posted by: badnewcastle
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
This is why guns should be banned.
hmm... I'm pretty sure the AK-47 is banned. Helped a lot in this case. 😕:disgust:
Originally posted by: badnewcastle
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
This is why guns should be banned.
hmm... I'm pretty sure the AK-47 is banned. Helped a lot in this case. 😕:disgust:
Originally posted by: Thump553
Reading between the lines, it sounds to me like this clown was doing a drug deal on Halloween night and freaked out with the knock on the door. I doubt he meant to shoot a kid, but don't doubt that he meant to shoot the cops or someone coming to rob the deal. I base my guess (and that's all it is) on the woman running away with $7500 cash. "I thought it was a robbery" is just a lame BS excuse.
It's an unfortunate aspect of American life that the easy availability of guns makes such tragedies all too common. Something to think about by all you who constantly insist on everyone's rights to bear as many and as powerful weapons as they want.
I hope maximum sentences are imposed for all involved after fair trial.
Originally posted by: Craig234
Gun laws are no guarantee against this happening; executing more people is no guarantee against this happening; but those responses draw attention like flames draw moths, while few are willing to look at the less interesting, more complex question of how to reduce crime as social problem - poverty, drugs, education, work resources, and so on. I think that's an important area for reducing tragedies like this.
Originally posted by: mugs
You don't need a reason to grant a right, you need a reason to take a right away.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Proportional to population growth, individual incidents are going to increase. And, with the media constantly looking for shock and awe pieces, these more frequently occurring incidents will be broadcast far and wide. The solution is to stop growing the population. Gun restriction discussion is just subterfuge.