[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Mr Hanky

Gracie you have every right as an American to not want to own or even like guns. I appreciate your position on that and you have pretty much sat back on this issue.
It's the positions of some others though that make inflametary remaks about good citizens that choose the right to Cary or own weapons that gets stuff flying.
Because a previous poster dislikes certain weapons he wants to use words like juvenile and other baseless remarks. Again Gracie I appreciate your position,I really do. I wish more people were as graceful as you when stating a position. They could learn a lot from you. I know I have.

Also for a previous poster ......
everyone I know that target shoots with an assault riffle is a police officer and no they don't use them in the line of duty, just for target practice.

Well, that's very different if you are an active police officer with an assault weapon. Not sure if retired police officers need assault weapons, however, unless they are in a community where there might be a need of retired officers with such weapons like parts of many big cities like Baltimore, D.C. Chicago, NYC, Buffalo, Minneapolis-St. Paul, etc. Cannot really see a practical reason why any retired person in the Villages, for instance, would need an assault rifle. Local police have them in their vehicles.

[Figmo Bohica]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Well, that's very different if you are an active police officer with an assault weapon. Not sure if retired police officers need assault weapons, however, unless they are in a community where there might be a need of retired officers with such weapons like parts of many big cities like Baltimore, D.C. Chicago, NYC, Buffalo, Minneapolis-St. Paul, etc. Cannot really see a practical reason why any retired person in the Villages, for instance, would need an assault rifle. Local police have them in their vehicles.

Guess you have never been to a 3 gun shooting event or to a military rifle match, or to a CMP match.

Now define "assualt rifle?"

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

Guess you have never been to a 3 gun shooting event or to a military rifle match, or to a CMP match.

Now define "assualt rifle?"

Please - don't stand on definitions. That's the lawyerly way out of an argument. I define it much like the congress defined pornography "I'll know it when I see it"!

So I take it that you are in favor of the ability to purchase, carry and use multi-bullet (pick a number) re loadable chamber semi-automatic weapons? If so then we are at a stand still. Because no matter your definition I am not in favor. You can tell from my language that I have no clue about guns and I have no interest in owning one for protection. But I did enjoy target shooting when I was younger.

[ugotme]

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...ion-rifles.jpg

Sorry - could not get this pic to load on here. If you click on this you will see two IDENTICAL rifles - but one sure does look "meaner!"
Although identical, the bottom one would be considered an "assault weapon" by most people.

[Rebel Pirate]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Is it possible that people who feel they need to own guns are different than me?

Absolutely!..we're all different! To quote a well known sage, "I have to be myself. Everyone else is taken." We're all products of genetics and our experiences. If our experiences were the same, perhaps we'd have similar views. Here's a summary of one of my experiences.

I am not a "gun person." I don't feel a need to own guns...it's a choice I make.

About 20 years ago I was in the military and stationed in southern California. I had never carried a weapon in my car except while driving from one duty station to the next; otherwise, they were locked up at my home. I never planned or expected to carry a weapon outside my home. Where were you April 29, 1992? For me, it was a normal west coast day...cool and sunny. Then it changed dramatically. What came to be known as the Rodney King riots broke out. I’ve got several stories, both personal and from teammates. No one from my organization was killed or seriously injured, but there were close calls. The riots produced 50+ killed and 200+ seriously injured; smoke from car fires on the nearby freeway wafted through our workspaces; a 15 minute drive took 2 1/2 hours because the freeways were closed; televised video showed innocent people pulled from their cars being beaten and murdered. It was a surreal change from the beautiful, laidback place that existed shortly before.

The next week there was a pistol in my car wherever I went...and the only place I went was to/from duty. Duty demanded I go to my station; prudence dictated I be prepared to defend myself. This experience didn’t turn me into a gun person. But it convinced me that law and order can breakdown without warning, and then it’s too late to buy a gun, become proficient with it, get a concealed carry permit, learn how to carry it, etc. It also crystalized the truth that police can’t prevent crime and they won’t be available when you need them most.

I now have a concealed carry permit and I plan to have one when I move to The Villages. I don’t ever plan to carry a weapon either in The Villages, outside The Villages, either on my person or in my car, other than when transporting guns to/from the range. But, if “something” ever happens I’ll be prepared. I don’t expect “something” will ever happen...but then I never expected “something” to happen before April 28, 1992. I have no problem at all with ANYONE who chooses to NOT own a firearm. But, in the event that "something" happens, the police are nowhere in sight, and you absolutely must travel (like to a hospital) you might show up at my door. I'll be prepared to help you...whether you like guns or not.

I own a home and have homeowners insurance. Neither owning a gun nor having a concealed carry permit defines me...not anymore than owning a home and having an insurance policy defines me.

I am not a "gun person."

[Russ_Boston]

Originally Posted by Rebel Pirate

Absolutely!..we're all different! To quote a well known sage, "I have to be myself. Everyone else is taken." We're all products of genetics and our experiences. If our experiences were the same, perhaps we'd have similar views. Here's a summary of one of my experiences.

I am not a "gun person." I don't feel a need to own guns...it's a choice I make.

About 20 years ago I was in the military and stationed in southern California. I had never carried a weapon in my car except while driving from one duty station to the next; otherwise, they were locked up at my home. I never planned or expected to carry a weapon outside my home. Where were you April 29, 1992? For me, it was a normal west coast day...cool and sunny. Then it changed dramatically. What came to be known as the Rodney King riots broke out. I’ve got several stories, both personal and from teammates. No one from my organization was killed or seriously injured, but there were close calls. The riots produced 50+ killed and 200+ seriously injured; smoke from car fires on the nearby freeway wafted through our workspaces; a 15 minute drive took 2 1/2 hours because the freeways were closed; televised video showed innocent people pulled from their cars being beaten and murdered. It was a surreal change from the beautiful, laidback place that existed shortly before.

The next week there was a pistol in my car wherever I went...and the only place I went was to/from duty. Duty demanded I go to my station; prudence dictated I be prepared to defend myself. This experience didn’t turn me into a gun person. But it convinced me that law and order can breakdown without warning, and then it’s too late to buy a gun, become proficient with it, get a concealed carry permit, learn how to carry it, etc. It also crystalized the truth that police can’t prevent crime and they won’t be available when you need them most.

I now have a concealed carry permit and I plan to have one when I move to The Villages. I don’t ever plan to carry a weapon either in The Villages, outside The Villages, either on my person or in my car, other than when transporting guns to/from the range. But, if “something” ever happens I’ll be prepared. I don’t expect “something” will ever happen...but then I never expected “something” to happen before April 28, 1992. I have no problem at all with ANYONE who chooses to NOT own a firearm. But, in the event that "something" happens, the police are nowhere in sight, and you absolutely must travel (like to a hospital) you might show up at my door. I'll be prepared to help you...whether you like guns or not.

I own a home and have homeowners insurance. Neither owning a gun nor having a concealed carry permit defines me...not anymore than owning a home and having an insurance policy defines me.

I am not a "gun person."

I think you'll read that the vast majority of us who don't own guns have little issue with a permit for a hand gun for protection etc. But it gets crazy with these semi-automatic rifles etc. in my opinion. I too was held up at gun point but looking back at it I'm glad I didn't have a gun because in the end no one was injured, no shots were fired. I just lost some cash and the 3 'guys' were caught and sentenced to 3-5 years. Would the outcome have been different if one of the people being robbed (there were 5 of us) were carrying a weapon?

[Taltarzac725]

Do gun bans work? | The Columbus Dispatch

I still see the best way to create an effective "assault rifle" ban is to put a reasonable person standard into the legislation on gun restrictions. At least, that will cover some of the tricks the NRA and gun manufacturers will have to get around any ban. The lawyers would be fighting in courts though to get the best precedent for their side(s) on how a reasonable person defines "assault rifle".

[JoeC1947]

All this talk about what is an assault rifle and, should they be banned is irrelevant. Just as much damage can be inflicted with a pump action shot gun if not more.

[Cantwaittoarrive]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Well, that's very different if you are an active police officer with an assault weapon. Not sure if retired police officers need assault weapons, however, unless they are in a community where there might be a need of retired officers with such weapons like parts of many big cities like Baltimore, D.C. Chicago, NYC, Buffalo, Minneapolis-St. Paul, etc. Cannot really see a practical reason why any retired person in the Villages, for instance, would need an assault rifle. Local police have them in their vehicles.

I don't own a gun. I have never owned a gun that was mine. I don't ever plan to own a gun. I am however all for freedom and the US Constitution and against a ban on guns. Here is what confuses me with this disscussion. The term "assault weapon" "assault rifle" "shotgun" have been thrown around as if they are different items, In an earlier post you stated something along the lines that a shotgun would be as effective as an assault rifle in a home invasion, thereby implying that owning a shotgun is ok in your book. I don't understand why a shotgun is ok in your book as I'm sure you realize that shoutguns can also be an assault weapon? as can a pistol? Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I think just throwing terms around without a understanding of what they mean just confuses a otherwise well thought out argument(s). I of course disagree with your arguments but I respect you and your passion

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Cantwaittoarrive

I don't own a gun. I have never owned a gun that was mine. I don't ever plan to own a gun. I am however all for freedom and the US Constitution and against a ban on guns. Here is what confuses me with this disscussion. The term "assault weapon" "assault rifle" "shotgun" have been thrown around as if they are different items, In an earlier post you stated something along the lines that a shotgun would be as effective as an assault rifle in a home invasion, thereby implying that owning a shotgun is ok in your book. I don't understand why a shotgun is ok in your book as I'm sure you realize that shoutguns can also be an assault weapon? as can a pistol? Assault weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I think just throwing terms around without a understanding of what they mean just confuses a otherwise well thought out argument(s). I of course disagree with your arguments but I respect you and your passion

Read in context for the definitions. Not sure what the US Constitutions' 2nd Amendment means without the context of the various US Supreme Court cases that interpret what rights we as citizens actually have.
Supreme Court Gun Rights Case Likely On The Horizon

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/us...ling.html?_r=0

Gun Control and the Second Amendment


Gun Control and Gun Rights - News - US News and World Report

There is no practically way to collect shotguns, handguns, hunting rifles and the like from people who now have them. Of course they can be used for assault weapons as can just about anything from rock to club to baseball bat to broken wine bottle to knife to handgun to shotgun.

"Assault rifle" I would bet would be understood by most people polled to mean a weapon that fires at a certain rate and with a certain muzzle velocity no matter what it looks like from the outside. Magazine quantity is also a factor.

[Figmo Bohica]

This should help clear up some of the argument and help in the discussion.

The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally "storm rifle", "storm" as in "military attack"). The name was coined by Adolf Hitler as a new name for the Maschinenpistole subsequently known as the Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first assault rifle that served to popularise the concept and form the basis for today's modern assault rifles.

The translation assault rifle gradually became the common term for similar firearms sharing the same technical definition as the StG 44. In a strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:

1.It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock);
2.It must be capable of selective fire;
3.It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle;
4.Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt.
5.And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)

Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles despite frequently being considered as such. For example, semi-automatic-only rifles like the AR-15 (which the M16 rifle is based on) that share parts or design characteristics with assault rifles are not assault rifles, as they are not capable of switching to automatic fire and thus are not selective fire capable. Belt-fed weapons or rifles with fixed magazines are likewise not assault rifles because they do not have detachable box magazines.

The term "assault rifle" is often more loosely used for commercial or political reasons to include other types of arms, particularly arms that fall under a strict definition of the battle rifle, or semi-automatic variant of military rifles such as AR-15s.

Now let's discuss "assualt rifle" "assualt gun" or anyother "assualt xxxxxxxx" you want to call it.

[EdV]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

.....What reasonable purpose does an assault rifle have?? I cannot come up with one. Maybe if you are battling the Taliban or a gang of drug dealers. We have soldiers, S.W.A.T, and police for those purposes.

Well for one thing, the AR-15 (used in last month's tragic shooting) makes an excellent varmint hunting rifle as reviewed in this article.

[paulandjean]

ITS ALL ABOUT MONEY. Somebody makes money training the shooter, Somebody makes money selling guns and ammo to the shooters. Has nothing to do with "right to bear arms"

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by EdV

Well for one thing, the AR-15 (used in last month's tragic shooting) makes an excellent varmint hunting rifle as reviewed in this article.

That's not really a critical review but just a "I did this" kind of article. Would not a 30-06 or some other rifle work just as well for hunting coyotes?

I have not shot a gun since 1980 or so but had a couple of 12 gauges and a few 22s for target shooting. These were a single shot and a Winchester like replica with a lever action.

I have not had much interest in guns/rifles etc since 1980.

Paul and Jean are right IMHO that the major impetus behind the anti-gun control fighters is the money involved. I wonder how much funding the NRA gets from arms manufacturers? VPC - The Violence Policy Center - National Rifle Association Receives Millions of Dollars From Gun Industry "Corporate Partners" New VPC Report Reveals (04/13/2011)

[Cantwaittoarrive]

This story that the OP started this thread with finally received coverage on Fox News at 2:23 PM EST today