Need some advice about Guns

[kapolani]

You should probably just go ahead and buy an assault rifle. Appears to be easy as pie.

Takes seven days. You have to fill out paperwork. The paperwork is then screened by the Maryland State Police. If you have no police record and are a law abiding citizen you can purchase a weapon after the whole process.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2wwkplIiq1rt278mo1_1280.jpg

Nice looking weapon.

 

[jnday]

You should probably just go ahead and buy an assault rifle. Appears to be easy as pie.

It is not as easy as it should be. It takes me about 30 min. for the whole process. 30 min. to buy something that I have every right to buy and own.

 

[YosemiteSam]

It is not as easy as it should be. It takes me about 30 min. for the whole process. 30 min. to buy something that I have every right to buy and own.

I'm not the least bit anti-gun, but I definitely don't believe the general public should be able to own an assault rifle. An assault rifle was created for war, not home protection, target shooting or game hunting.

IMO there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO credible reasons for ANYONE (as in a single person) to own one.

The only reason someone would want one is because they are cool. (and they definitely are) That IMO isn't a good enough reason to allow the ownership of one. These things were made to kill people wholesale.

 

[jnday]

I'm not the least bit anti-gun, but I definitely don't believe the general public should be able to own an assault rifle. An assault rifle was created for war, not home protection, target shooting or game hunting.

IMO there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO credible reasons for ANYONE (as in a single person) to own one.

The only reason someone would want one is because they are cool. (and they definitely are) That IMO isn't a good enough reason to allow the ownership of one. These things were made to kill people wholesale.

I have 14 assault weapons. I shoot them for the fun of it. They are not what I use for home protection. I once thought like you, that average people should not own them, but as I got older, I bought an AR and a AK. After shooting them, I realized I eas having a blast. Now I look at things different. The man behind the gun causes much more harm thsn the actual weapon. It is much safer for me to shoot one of the guns, than it would be to drink and drive. Guns are tools, nothing more. Like any tool, it's how you use them. The assault weapons are now used for hunting too.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I have 14 assault weapons. I shoot them for the fun of it. They are not what I use for home protection. I once thought like you, that average people should not own them, but as I got older, I bought an AR and a AK. After shooting them, I realized I eas having a blast. Now I look at things different. The man behind the gun causes much more harm thsn the actual weapon. It is much safer for me to shoot one of the guns, than it would be to drink and drive. Guns are tools, nothing more. Like any tool, it's how you use them. The assault weapons are now used for hunting too.

The problem for me isn't one man owning an assault weapon. It's the fact that assault weapons are available to be had by the general public. A man with 2 hand guns can walk into a crowded place and kill a lot of people quickly. That same man with an AK can kill exponentially more people and do it a lot faster. An assault weapon is essentially a weapon of mass destruction as far as guns go. There are absolute no reasonable reason why anyone needs a weapon that can cause that type of destruction that quickly.

Because they are *fun* just isn't a good enough reason for me.

 

[HeavyBarrel]

The problem for me isn't one man owning an assault weapon. It's the fact that assault weapons are available to be had by the general public. A man with 2 hand guns can walk into a crowded place and kill a lot of people quickly. That same man with an AK can kill exponentially more people and do it a lot faster. An assault weapon is essentially a weapon of mass destruction as far as guns go. There are absolute no reasonable reason why anyone needs a weapon that can cause that type of destruction that quickly.

Because they are *fun* just isn't a good enough reason for me.

You do know that what most people consider "assault weapons" are actually just semi automatic rifles and not fully automatic (machine guns)? I can't argue that a semi auto rifle with a large magazine can't do what you say, I'm just making sure you know legally owned machine guns (real battle rifles) are VERY difficult to acquire and is not what Holmes used.....

 

[YosemiteSam]

You do know that what most people consider "assault weapons" are actually just semi automatic rifles and not fully automatic (machine guns)? I can't argue that a semi auto rifle with a large magazine can't do what you say, I'm just making sure you know legally owned machine guns (real battle rifles) are VERY difficult to acquire and is not what Holmes used.....

Yes, I do. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated. (why even that? They should be completely illegal) Anyhow, that doesn't mean you can't unload a full 30 clip from an AR 15 in less than 10 seconds.

 

[a_minimalist]

I'm not the least bit anti-gun, but I definitely don't believe the general public should be able to own an assault rifle. An assault rifle was created for war, not home protection, target shooting or game hunting.

IMO there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO credible reasons for ANYONE (as in a single person) to own one.

The only reason someone would want one is because they are cool. (and they definitely are) That IMO isn't a good enough reason to allow the ownership of one. These things were made to kill people wholesale.

I used to share the same opinion until about a week ago. I just found a lot of the current dialogue to be uninformed. The funny thing was that I was uninformed and still found it to be uninformed. That's pretty bad.

We will never be able to stop crazies from harming people. They will always find a way to harm people with or without an assault rifle. It's sad but true.

Part of the 2nd Amendment is there for people to protect themselves from a corrupt government. The likelihood of our government ever becoming so evil seems unlikely. But God forbid it ever did that's why the 2nd Amendment is there, to protect yourself. Granted that's very extreme but that's why it's there. It would be hard enough to do that now with current gun laws. Banning assault rifles would make it impossible.

For me personally, I'd want one just to play with at the range.

It seems like most discussions are based on knee jerk reactions today.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I used to share the same opinion until about a week ago. I just found a lot of the current dialogue to be uninformed. The funny thing was that I was uninformed and still found it to be uninformed. That's pretty bad.

We will never be able to stop crazies from harming people. They will always find a way to harm people with or without an assault rifle. It's sad but true.

Part of the 2nd Amendment is there for people to protect themselves from a corrupt government. The likelihood of our government ever becoming so evil seems unlikely. But God forbid it ever did that's why the 2nd Amendment is there, to protect yourself. Granted that's very extreme but that's why it's there. It would be hard enough to do that now with current gun laws. Banning assault rifles would make it impossible.

For me personally, I'd want one just to play with at the range.

It seems like most discussions are based on knee jerk reactions today.

Again, I'm not anti-gun at all. I think I noted earlier in this thread about wanting to purchase one, but given that I will probably be moving into the city, that might not be a good idea since they are so strict about it.

I would love to play with an automatic weapon too. I just don't see any use of someone owning one other than fun and being fun isn't a practical reason. Setting off a nuclear blast would be fun too, but of course I'm not allowed to do that. :laugh2:

 

[a_minimalist]

Again, I'm not anti-gun at all. I think I noted earlier in this thread about wanting to purchase one, but given that I will probably be moving into the city, that might not be a good idea since they are so strict about it.

I would love to play with an automatic weapon too. I just don't see any use of someone owning one other than fun and being fun isn't a practical reason. Setting off a nuclear blast would be fun too, but of course I'm not allowed to do that. :laugh2:

Lol well I'm not going to belittle you for having a different opinion than me, like others like to do. If that's how you feel that's how you feel. I respect that and I absolutely understand that side of the argument. I just think it goes much deeper than banning assault rifles.

 

[jobberone]

I've not in favor of assault rifles either but the problem is when they write the legislation they can't find a way to keep all semiautomatics from being banned. I used to have a stainless mini 14 I used to jump deer and I carried in the truck. That's an assault weapon to many. Many people use semiauto rifles to hunt although I wouldn't. Some then want to drag semiautomatic pistols into the fray because they're anti-gun.

I've fired more than a few weapons on fully auto. Unless its mounted you can only fire short bursts accurately. In a fire fight I'd prefer it but there are no practical uses for it outside law enforcement and the military (or criminal use unfortunately). Collectors can own preexisting machine guns but it's a pain to obtain one. Personally I'd never own one.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I've not in favor of assault rifles either but the problem is when they write the legislation they can't find a way to keep all semiautomatics from being banned. I used to have a stainless mini 14 I used to jump deer and I carried in the truck. That's an assault weapon to many. Many people use semiauto rifles to hunt although I wouldn't. Some then want to drag semiautomatic pistols into the fray because they're anti-gun.

I've fired more than a few weapons on fully auto. Unless its mounted you can only fire short bursts accurately. In a fire fight I'd prefer it but there are no practical uses for it outside law enforcement and the military (or criminal use unfortunately). Collectors can own preexisting machine guns but it's a pain to obtain one. Personally I'd never own one.

Just a nice little tip or trick I learned back in the day. It can come in handy with semi three round bursts weapons as well as fully auto.

When you are in the position to rest the barrel of the weapon on something (sand bag in a fox hole, fallen lumber, fence post, tree limb or whatever) instead of putting your left hand (well left hand if you are right handed) under the barrel...put it on top (if the rifle has barrel guards/grip).

Learned this from a ranger.

The reason it tends to help with accuracy during fast firing is that most of the time these weapons will start drifting up in mid fire. Putting the hand on top and holding down prevents the drift up and makes it a little more accurate.

Just something for someone to try next time they go out on the range and might be firing from a fox hole or with the barrel resting on something.

 

[burmafrd]

Just a nice little tip or trick I learned back in the day. It can come in handy with semi three round bursts weapons as well as fully auto.

When you are in the position to rest the barrel of the weapon on something (sand bag in a fox hole, fallen lumber, fence post, tree limb or whatever) instead of putting your left hand (well left hand if you are right handed) under the barrel...put it on top (if the rifle has barrel guards/grip).

Learned this from a ranger.

The reason it tends to help with accuracy during fast firing is that most of the time these weapons will start drifting up in mid fire. Putting the hand on top and holding down prevents the drift up and makes it a little more accurate.

Just something for someone to try next time they go out on the range and might be firing from a fox hole or with the barrel resting on something.

That does help. And if you have a more powerful weapon the more help it will be.

 

[burmafrd]

I used to share the same opinion until about a week ago. I just found a lot of the current dialogue to be uninformed. The funny thing was that I was uninformed and still found it to be uninformed. That's pretty bad.

We will never be able to stop crazies from harming people. They will always find a way to harm people with or without an assault rifle. It's sad but true.

Part of the 2nd Amendment is there for people to protect themselves from a corrupt government. The likelihood of our government ever becoming so evil seems unlikely. But God forbid it ever did that's why the 2nd Amendment is there, to protect yourself. Granted that's very extreme but that's why it's there. It would be hard enough to do that now with current gun laws. Banning assault rifles would make it impossible.

For me personally, I'd want one just to play with at the range.

It seems like most discussions are based on knee jerk reactions today.

That was always the primary reason for the 2nd Ammendment. It was written by people who had lived through a revolution.

They wanted the PEOPLE to have the ABILITY to resist a tyrannical government.

That is why it was always understood by all those but the rabid anti gunners that the 2nd Amendment LIKE ALL THE FIRST OTHER NINE was an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. Not collective in any way.

The first thing the Communist did when taking over a country was ban the private ownership of basically anything other then shotguns and sometimes even that. Same with Hitler and Mussolinni.

They wanted a people who could NOT resist what they wanted to do.

Handguns frankly are almost a side issue. I honestly do not have a problem with registration and control of handguns. Not like Chicago and NYC and company but reasonable controls.

Handgun when it really comes down to it are not much good without a LOT of practice - CONSTANT practice. Which is very expensive for anything other than 22.

By the way- while it costs more - if you intend to use a firearm for self defense or home defense- practice with the same ammo or at the very least ammo that will fire and act the same as what you will use for real. Practicing with one kind and having to use another when it matters is NOT a good thing.

 

[Dodger]

I used to have a stainless mini 14 I used to jump deer and I carried in the truck. That's an assault weapon to many.

That would depend on the model of mini-14.

Clinton's assault weapons ban of 1994 defined assault weapons (rifles in particular) as a semi-auto rifle that accepted detachable magazines and had any two of the following characteristics of an assault rifle: a folding or telescoping stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash suppressor, and grenade launcher. Only the tactical rifle model falls under this description, yet all models are equally effective at killing. I'm not trying to be political here, but that should tell people how silly that ban was and their definition of 'assault weapon.'

 

[a_minimalist]

That would depend on the model of mini-14.

Clinton's assault weapons ban of 1994 defined assault weapons (rifles in particular) as a semi-auto rifle that accepted detachable magazines and had any two of the following characteristics of an assault rifle: a folding or telescoping stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash suppressor, and grenade launcher. Only the tactical rifle model falls under this description, yet all models are equally effective at killing. I'm not trying to be political here, but that should tell people how silly that ban was and their definition of 'assault weapon.'

I've been doing a lot of research and reading about gun laws recently. Some just make no sense at all. Living in New Jersey you have to transport a gun unloaded in a locked case in your trunk. That makes sense to me. But the next part is that ammo needs to be in a separate case or bag. It can be in the same place as the gun. Just think about that. What the hell does that do? I'd love to know who came up with that.

 

[a_minimalist]

That was always the primary reason for the 2nd Ammendment. It was written by people who had lived through a revolution.

They wanted the PEOPLE to have the ABILITY to resist a tyrannical government.

That is why it was always understood by all those but the rabid anti gunners that the 2nd Amendment LIKE ALL THE FIRST OTHER NINE was an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. Not collective in any way.

The first thing the Communist did when taking over a country was ban the private ownership of basically anything other then shotguns and sometimes even that. Same with Hitler and Mussolinni.

They wanted a people who could NOT resist what they wanted to do.

Handguns frankly are almost a side issue. I honestly do not have a problem with registration and control of handguns. Not like Chicago and NYC and company but reasonable controls.

Handgun when it really comes down to it are not much good without a LOT of practice - CONSTANT practice. Which is very expensive for anything other than 22.

By the way- while it costs more - if you intend to use a firearm for self defense or home defense- practice with the same ammo or at the very least ammo that will fire and act the same as what you will use for real. Practicing with one kind and having to use another when it matters is NOT a good thing.

Well you said that about 10x better than I did.