Should semi automatic weapons be banned?
Much debate has gone on as to whether this entire classification of weapons should be removed from the market. Present your best argument for or against such moves to ban a popular weapon classification.
|
3
points
I personally believe semi auto should be allowed in the firearm market because even with autoloaders restricted, tragedies like Newtown could have been pulled off with a double action revolver, quite easily. Plus, weapons like the Ruger 10/22, which is an autoloading repeater chambered for .22 LR, would be placed on the BATF's Title 2 Class 3 weapons list, which tend to get pricey. Face Palm... Where do I begin with this? Your right to keep and bear arms is not something that is balanced against a need to own them. It's better to have the means to defend yourself and not need it than to ever need it and not have it. We have the right to keep and bear arms (2nd Amendment) as a means to defend ourselves, our freedoms and our State's from (among other things) tyranny. Just as it was with the revolutionary war, if we (the people) are ever to face men with guns to defend ourselves, we would need at least the same kind of personal weapons that they (our oppressors) would have. 1
point
2
points
0
points
Face Palm... Where do I begin with this? Your right to keep and bear arms is not something that is balanced against a need to own them. It's better to have the means to defend yourself and not need it than to ever need it and not have it. We have the right to keep and bear arms (2nd Amendment) as a means to defend ourselves, our freedoms and our State's from (among other things) tyranny. Just as it was with the revolutionary war, if we (the people) are ever to face men with guns to defend ourselves, we would need at least the same kind of personal weapons that they (our oppressors) would have. For defense. Semi-automatic weapons are great for home defense as well as defending one's family. It is used for hunting purposes as well. A minescule fraction of a percent of semi-auto weapons are used in a crime. More people die from table utensils than semi-auto. There is no reason to ban them. I have a perfect compromise that will satisfy both sides of whether or not semi automatic weapons should be banned. This is essentially an issue of rate of fire. How long it takes to fire how many bullets. The question is why does one need a semi auto gun? The most important answer is for self-defense. It can take only one shot to defend against an attacker. But that one shot could miss. People have varying levels of shooting skill (read accuracy). Now one could have two or more guns to give them more chances to defend themselves. But this is impractical. There is only one answer that makes sense and should satisfy all concerned (I say should because (believe it or not) some people can never be satisfied). Make semi automatic weapons that have cycle systems (essentially rate of fire) capable of being fine tuned. This way an accurate shooter will have a weapon with a relatively slow rate of fire since they will, most likely, need fewer shots to defend themselves. I defy anyone to find a flaw in this system. Here are a few: 1) Guns are easy to take apart, so the parts that have been put into place might be able to be taken out and replaced with something that doesn't work that way. 2) You want gun manufacturers to build a product that is inferior, and you want to people who like the good stuff to settle for lower quality. 3) What if there are multiple attackers and you are inaccurate? What a terrible situation to be in. I might have more later. 1
point
1
point
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has a startling revelation for 2015. It is projected that deaths from guns will surpass deaths from car fatalities in 2015. An estimated 33,000 Americans will lose their lives from guns as opposed to an estimated 32,000 Americans who will die in car accidents. The gun violence in America is an American Shame! |
