[DeLunatics]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

General George Patton wore either Colt 45 or SW 357 revolvers during war. That was good enough for him. Should be more than enough fire power for any gun loving civilian, imho.

I mean, you understand, that he had an armored division at his command, right?

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by Marine1974

An AR -15 although not fully automatic, should not be sold to civilians. It purpose is for mass killings. The manufacturers should be banned from selling weapons like these and banned from making anymore ammunition. There are plenty of other weapons to choose from
that will satisfy your rights . How much more slaughter of innocent children can you endure ? Only
My opinion as a former US Marine trained as a lethal tool .

I am also a former USMC, but I know the difference between an "assault weapon" and other weapons. I also know the difference between an "automatic weapon" and a semi-automatic weapon. According to the ignorant (uninformed) citizenry, anything that "LOOKS" like a military weapon, must be deemed a military weapon. Apparently, some folks feel that citizens should only be able to own muzzle loading, cap and ball and flintlock guns, since that is all the founders of the Constitution had. Of course, those were the original "assault weapons" but some uninformed folks don't take that into consideration.
Of course, any subject that is related to violence in America must be diverted to the anti-gun argument. The OP did not suggest that this is a 2nd Amendment situation. The OP mentioned that the parent of a violent juvenile is being charged with a felony due to the actions of his son. If the son had used a knife, ax or baseball bat and the father was charged, would there still be a debate regarding what the weapon "looked like?"
By the way, I have a 22cal semi-automatic rifle that resembles a military rifle. I enjoy shooting paper targets with it. Perhaps, my rifle should be banned because someone might get scared because it is a "military style" weapon? It was originally a standard, wood stock rifle that I converted with a plastic stock. It still operates exactly like it did before, but just looks different. The other day, I saw a golf cart that looked like on old WWII army jeep. Did that make it a "military style" vehicle? When someone says "well, you don't NEED a semi-auto weapon" it makes me wonder if they also tell people that they "don't need that high performance auto" or you don't need that big screen TV. Just because one does not "need" something, doesn't mean that it should be banned. Like someone else said, just because a parent is negligent or has poor parenting skills, does not mean that all parents with juvenile delinquents are bad parents and charged with felonies.
Everyone has an opinion and this is mine as a "former Marine."