Assault weapons
 

I know many of you guys support gun ownership in general. But What do you think about the ban on assault weapons that Biden is trying to get Congress to act on?

I'm for it. I've been a gun owner for 60 years and could live with the idea of no autoloading firearms and a low magazine capacity limit (~5 rounds). There's nothing you can't do with such a weapon other than the spray-and-pray that autoloading weapons with high capacity magazines are made for.

No guns here. I'm fully behind keeping weapons of war out of civilian's hands.

Hi Barbara. Good to see you.

100% in favor, even more so since a local kid killed 7 people and maimed many more at our local 4th of July parade this past summer.

No need for civilians to have such weapons IMO.

The upside of civilians owning a rapid fire, rapidly reloadable, efficient killing tool like an AR-15 is that some big boys get to enjoy playing with a military toy, and indulge in various power fantasies. The downside is that those boys who get crazy can easily kill lots of people before they are stopped.

The upside does not seem worth the downside.

The thing I notice when guns are the issue is that for many it is an either or reaction. Mention reasonable gun laws and the fanatics think all guns will be taken from them.
I have been watching tv about the latest shooting. I am just frustrated and saddened by the news.

They think that because that's the narrative the NRA and the gun industry pushes.

Few are actually pushing for total gun bans, but you'd never know it by listening to the NRA.

It never occurred to me that the NRA pushed that idea. How dumb am I. That makes so much sense.

The NRA says jump and Republican legislators say "How high?".

Firearm owner since boyhood and own a AR15 style weapon with 30 round mags.

Would I give it up?
Of course if the country enacted legislation requiring this for everyone. Would expect some sort of compensation. Tax rebate or the likes.

I'm in favor of having all who want to own any firearm pass a background check. Take weapon safety training and show proficiency in their use. Then be licensed, permitted and also carry liability insurance. A one going requirement.

All sales require paperwork and background checking. Even at gun shows or private sales.
The need to go to a local PD and have it transferred.

Strictly enforced!

As a owner of these weapons, not for hunting rather as sport shooting. Target practice and getting together with friends. Have a much fun with the Black ,.22's as the 30-06's, 556's.

The feel has changed over the years when shooting at gun ranges. Today there are many new shooters buying weapons with little background knowledge. Ignorant of safety or proper weapon maintenance. many a time I will leave the range due to unsafe shooters. Playing rapid fire, video game movie type shooting.

Oerets
So you are saying you like owing an AR15 style weapon just for the fun of shooting it?
I do not mean to sound accusatory but could you not have fun shooting a less lethal weapon? Maybe if I had ever had the experience of shooting a firearm I would understand better.
By the way I totally respect your viewpoint and think your suggestions for gun ownership are great.

As I read the Constitution's ill-written political albatross, the 2nd amendment, your right to bear arms depends on you being of good enough character and trainable enough that the local militia would have you. That translates very well into the background and training requirements you mention. The assault weapon ban is a bit trickier to get past the old 2nd A, though of course the right Supreme Court would find a way. The answer is probably in that phrase 'well-regulated.' I'm willing to say you have to be quite regulated indeed to rate an assault weapon.

The AR was purchased relatively resent. Went years not having a larger than a .22 mag fed semi auto rifle. A good friend bought one on sale. At the time IIRC all of the people I knew who were on the Right were buying them up like crazy.

Got immense pleasure buying it and seeing the look on their faces knowing Lefty can also own one. The rifle is a very easy weapon to use. Will go to the range with my friend and shoot. We both have a love of weapons. All kinds and this is a hobby .

I have a permit by the state and have been for over thirty years. Guns registered too. Like I said before grew up around firearms. Living on a farm and did varmaint hunting with my Grandfather and Father. Spending the day with my wife and her Father at the range. Teaching and shooting with my sons.

Can legally carry concealed pistol.
Do I?
No! Could not remember the last time I carried.

By all accounts the AR-15 is fun to shoot if you like to shoot. Way way back, I remember my friend's Mini-15 was fun to shoot. Of course, I think the real appeal is what the AR-15 has come to mean, in your case maybe "family and tradition," or very commonly "freedom made tangible (and expensive)" or "my fears shall be no more" or "fear me!" or "power to people like us!" or any number of such expressions. (I won't say "rednecks rule"....) :)

Only speaking from personal experience. Come from family friends all shooting sport fans. Family get together’s cookouts would on occasion have target practice. Most hunt fish enjoy outdoor activities. Competition shooting for bragging rights or even Turkey shoots.
Even my wife was raised knowing how to use firearms.

In this country it is a sad state when more attention to changing laws. Is now being given to the sexual in nature content exposed to our children. Then to lethal weapons exposure and availability.

The current sex panic is ridiculous, as these panics always are. Remember when everyone went nuts over the imagined Satanists at the daycares?

There's a saying from the Talmud, the last part of which is quoted a lot: "But man was created alone to teach you that whoever kills one life kills the world entire, and whoever saves one life saves the world entire."

People who say that the school shootings kill few in our nation of hundreds of millions need to ponder the first part. Even one child killed is an infinite loss.

I be fine with a complete ban on what is called Assault weapons. With a buy back from current owners of some type. Or just a strict hurdle of permitting to own one. High capacity mag semi auto pistols also be included into any legislation enacted.
Buying back money funded from licensing fees and the gun industry. For the gun industry is behind the sales. Driven to ever increasing levels.

Even a requirement of carrying high liability insurance.

Again in this country having a Drag Queen show, Transgender student, ect....books that have subjects some dislike.....:rolleyes: gets quick and draconian action.
Yet what number of shooting's is the magic one to finally get some real action?:confused:

^^^^ This!!!

And the Gun Show "loop hole" thingy is mispresented. If they have a table they are doing back ground. The "loop hole" is the private sales occurring at the gun show, same laws apply as if you came to my house to buy, its a private transaction with no requirement for a back ground check. It should be required!

BTW we were doing some steel plate ringin' with our AR-15/22 and 1911/22 yesterday. Familiarization and safe usage training for the GF and a couple of her friends.

My solution is all sales, transfers ALL. needing to be documented by law enforcement.

Period!

The gun show having a table with law enforcement doing the background checks and registering. Or go to the local PD station and complete the actions needed.

Any not would be deemed illegal and strict penalties enforced.


SWMBO with a 9mm 1911 at the range.

The "loophole" is straw buyers making multiple "private" purchases at them for resale for profit to those that are "prohibited" for plainly criminal purposes.
Enforcement of existing prohibitions has been lax to nonexistent.

Historically "free" countries seem to do just fine without a version of the US second amendment.
https://impakter.com/why-gun-ownersh...d-not-same-us/

I doubt the FFs foresaw the unregulated proliferation of relatively affordable high capacity rapid fire lethal weaponry in the hands of irresponsible untrustworthy individuals.
History seems less than clear on the actual purpose of the 2nd Amendment as an alternative to a standing army or a poison pill for national Constitutional regulation to attract slaveholding states to the union against losing their "way of life".

What research I've done on the subject indicates that civil discussions on realistic solutions solving the problems with firearm overcommercialized proliferation and responsible firearm custodianship is rare and typically adversely contentious, leading to nothing other than more of the status quo.

The problem as I see it is that there are just so many freaking gun sales year that even if the laws are 99.5% effective that still puts guns in the hands of too many people who should never have been allowed to buy them.

Case in point: In the Highland Park shooting, the shooter's father approved the sale of an assault weapon to his 17 year old son, despite the fact that the son had previously threatened to kill himself and his entire family (an incident the father characterized as "overblown" after his son killed 7 people). Police came to the family's home multiple times and confiscated numerous weapons.

Yet, because the shooting occurred after the son had turned 18, there appears to be no criminal liability for the father for approving the sale. Also, assault weapons are banned in Highland Park (one of the few cities in the US to have such a ban) but the seller sold the gun to the family despite them being residents of that town.

And this is just for legal gun sales. You could also just drive 20 miles to Chicago and buy who knows what on the streets.The point being, there are going to be far too many cases where sales will slip through the cracks and people will die as a result.

Just too damned many guns is the problem. It's a disease infecting the U.S. How long before someone you know is a victim of this disease? For me, that happened last July.

If having more guns would make a person safer. Then why would not more countries owning nukes make the world safer?

The problem is that there are many gun owners who will never harm another. They may well own tens of them and never use in anger or self defense. Then there is the few who have no place in a civil society owning deadly weapons.

The issue should be how to keep them out of the hands of those few. Licensing registration training may not cure the problem. Until it is tried we will never know.

That has zero to do with the "Gun Show Loop Hole" this specific "Loop Hole" is the fact that I can (safely) carry a gun into the gun show with a for sale sign and sell it to "you" as a private sale with zero paperwork required.

Straw purchases are another but different problem. The number of guns one can buy at a gun show follows the state regulations that the show is taking place.

Actually quite pertinent where shows are unregulated. Nevada for one example.

I understand that, my point is, as with most things "political", details matter and people just say things out of ignorance of the issue or to fit their narrative. The gun show loop is the private sale thing. You ask most people what the "gun show loop hole is" and most will answer that gun show dealers do not do backgrounds, which is false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_sh...%20the%20buyer.

The only gun ownership I would support, and which I believe is right in line with the Second Amendment, would be for long barreled hunting rifles and shotguns. Single shot only, no magazines, no tube magazines, no revolving cylinders. Break down or other types of single round loading only.

Thorough, agonizing background checks, which would disqualify the usual suspects, felons, and anybody who has ever had an order of protection from them approved by the court. Hideously expensive license cost. And...anyone owning a hunting firearm, must also have a current, active federal hunting license which is hideously expensive and also requires thorough background checks. If the hunting license lapses, the ATF comes to your home and confiscates your firearms until you renew your hunting license. You have six months to renew, or your firearms are melted down.

Obviously possession of anything else, including assault rifles and handguns would be illegal. All the data shows a significant decrease in firearms homicides during the assault weapons ban.

Nobody's grandfathered in. Possession of unlicensed firearms is illegal. No screwing around, no appeals, no excuses, no ignorance. Get caught...first offense five years. Second offense fifteen years. Third offense...bye, bye.

Y'know barbara, I suspect I was as good with a high powered automatic rifle as anybody on this forum. I was a Marine Corps Expert qualifying with the M-14 rifle, which included a perfect 10 rounds in the silhouette bullseye from 500 yards prone position. Those of us who made this score from 500 yards were extended an offer to apply for USMC Scout Sniper School. Which I declined (and for which I was beaten).

I never fired a weapon again while in the Corps, and never handled a weapon again, after discharge. I don't get the "fun" of owning a gun that "ain't good for nuthin' but put a man six feet in a hole."

Being a realist at heart and knowing in this country for as long as there are free elections. That politicians wanting to be elected will never completely enact a close to total ban.

That now stated my hope is the leaders will go instead for laws to screen for the ones who should not own weapons. Do proper training and tracking of the firearms in the country.

The ship has sailed on eliminating so controlling them are steps towards reducing violence forward.

A true conservative party working for the will of the people is needed to siphon off Republican votes to have the Dems gain control for a while. Once the current tRumplican party goes the way of the WHIGS decent Republicans can migrate to this new conservative party and give us two parties working together again. Working for the people instead of wealthy special interests. Something like you mentioned may be achieved then.
Just my two-cents worth.

Ike, while I respect and appreciate responsible gun owners I think I will never be able to understand the desire to own an assault style weapon. My apologies to those here that have that desire. I mean no disrespect for your legal right. I just can not get the image of a class room of children being mowed down with fatal wounds in a matter of seconds out of my head.

No disrespect taken in any of your post and I will say this is intended respectfully. "Assault Weapon" is a political term at best.

All of these (pic below) will do what people think an AR15 does and the damage will be worst due to caliber of the weapons. The "political" slant is that the AR15 is an overly powerful "assault weapon" when in fact it shoots an "underpowered" round that most hunters use as long range small game/varmint hunting.

People make a lot of talking points from positions of ignorance.

None of those guns have 30-round magazines. Secondly, serious sportsmen don't use autoloading rifles to hunt big game, though some use AR-15's for varmints (though bolt-actions are more accurate and reliable).

The round fired from the AR15 the .556 or .223 is a very high velocity small caliber one. Will tumble due to the speed on impact. The back of the round being heavier and traveling so fast will be the cause. The round will do extensive damage to the body of victims. Not a thru and thru wound.

There are many styles of projectiles that will cause horrific wounds. Hollow Points Hydra Shocks Dumb Dumb Soft Point Double 00 to name a few. All designed to inflict inhumane wounds and should all be control or outlawed IMHO.

There is no reason for any weapon used by the public to have a max capacity of more the six rounds.

Those are just wrong statements, I know plenty of serious hunters that use auto loaders, my grandfather used a 30-06 auto loader for Elk his whole life.

A lot use AR 15 for varmint hunting.

You seen to be speaking from an out of touch position.

I will give you the 30 rd thing, but my point was huge capacity is not needed to do mass damage. My .357 Henry Lever action and GP100 would "work" just as well.

Think of it as a trophy that money can buy and I believe this is all it is since most people will have no use for it other than shooting it in gun ranges. Automotive equivalent is a Ferrari that people buy for vanity, but do not use it due risk of damage or theft. So most of them remain in their garages usually driven less than 5,000 miles a year. Of course, a Ferrari cost several times more so not everyone can buy one, but most people can afford a AR-15 type weapon.

There is plenty of info to be found for those on here that need some education to have an intelligent discussion. The .223 /.556 is not as fast as many with an avg of 2800fps, it is actually very slow compared to something like my 22/250.

Agree on the bullet types and 30 rds. That said most "shooters" on the street are probably going to buy the cheapest ammo they can get which is typically going to be some type of ball. At least the guns we were taking from people when I was playing Barney Fife were usually loaded with cheap FMJ practice ammo.

Like you, if (big if) the time comes I will turn in what I need to turn in. :o

I've been a gun owner and hunter for ~60 years and have about a dozen guns in my cabinet (none are autoloaders). I'm an NRA Distinguished Expert in Smallbore, a Range Safety Officer at my gun club, taught NRA Hunter Safety and Rifle and Shotgun Shooting Merit badge for the BSA. I also do a fair amount of my own gunsmithing (for me and friends) and reloading.

And no, your .357 Henry Lever Action is not as effective a killing machine as an AR-15 in terms of muzzle energy, terminal ballistics, range, rapid fire capability, and magazine capacity (nor does it have removable magazines). The AR-15 (or more accurately the M16 and its M4 carbine variant) are purpose-built weapons of war and is not the ideal weapon for any type of hunting, particularly big game (for which it is underpowered). If you think your statement proves your superior knowledge of firearms, it did the opposite.

FWIW, I have a Remington Model 7 in .223 Remington (effectively the same cartridge as the 5.56 NATO for which the AR-15 is chambered) and a 3-9x Leupold compact scope and it will easily outshoot (routinely 1/2 MOA) any AR-15 I've seen at the range. What it can't do is spray 30 rounds as fast I pull the trigger.