Time to protect your 2nd amendment rights! - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Botnst · #1 11-09-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

A thoughtful response and probably accurate.

Unfortunately, the downside to allowing every man to own a 50 caliber machine gun offsets the "nice to have the tools........." part of the above.

In the current society, it's simply impossible to outgun the government........might as well admit that fact and move on.

Your alternative is to allow the citizens to match weapons with the government. We're so far from that point........even today.......that the discussion is really moot.

I'm not the advocate of arming the citizens equal to the army, though I understand it and believe it is a valid point even it doesn't carry the argument. I agree with MTI's contention that no rights are absolute. Only an absolutist thinks in those terms and I have no special use for absolutists of any sort. They too easily make useful idiots for cynical leaders.

It isn't necessary to outgun the government. I doubt that any revolution was begun by people who outgunned the government they sought to overthrow, though I could be wrong.

What's necessary is that good men do something. There's no a guarantee of success. Most revolutions fail. At least the first time.

We know the results if good men do nothing.

B

Brian Carlton · #2 11-09-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

I'm not the advocate of arming the citizens equal to the army, though I understand it and believe it is a valid point even it doesn't carry the argument. I agree with MTI's contention that no rights are absolute. Only an absolutist thinks in those terms and I have no special use for absolutists of any sort. They too easily make useful idiots for cynical leaders.

It isn't necessary to outgun the government. I doubt that any revolution was begun by people who outgunned the government they sought to overthrow, though I could be wrong.

What's necessary is that good men do something. There's no a guarantee of success. Most revolutions fail. At least the first time.

We know the results if good men do nothing.

B

So, the question that begs an answer is where do you draw the line? If it's not necessary to outgun the government, and in consideration of the current "civilized" society, what weapons are permissible and what are not permissible?

My personal opinion is that weapons needed for self-defense or for sport should be permissible.......weapons utilized for outgunning a typical police force are not.

aklim · #3 11-09-2008, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

My personal opinion is that weapons needed for self-defense or for sport should be permissible.......weapons utilized for outgunning a typical police force are not.

Fair enough. What weapons do you think I can own short of a cruise missile that will outgun a typical police force on a one to one basis? My AK-47? My 12 gauge? Unless you are talking DU rounds, it is hard to imagine many weapons that are going to outgun the local police force seeing as how they have fully automatic assault rifles, shotguns, tear gas, etc, etc.

In fact, the M16 Assault rifle, IIRC doesn't even fire fully auto anymore. They have a 3 round burst. Why? Probably because full auto does little

Brian Carlton · #4 11-09-2008, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Fair enough. What weapons do you think I can own short of a cruise missile that will outgun a typical police force on a one to one basis? My AK-47? My 12 gauge? Unless you are talking DU rounds, it is hard to imagine many weapons that are going to outgun the local police force seeing as how they have fully automatic assault rifles, shotguns, tear gas, etc, etc.

In fact, the M16 Assault rifle, IIRC doesn't even fire fully auto anymore. They have a 3 round burst. Why? Probably because full auto does little

Like I said, I'm hardly the gun expert. Interpret the statement as you see fit.

What did those two clowns have that held off an entire police force for nearly one hour? Their firepower was amazing..........the police were outgunned until the full swat team arrived.

aklim · #5 11-09-2008, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

Like I said, I'm hardly the gun expert. Interpret the statement as you see fit.

What did those two clowns have that held off an entire police force for nearly one hour? Their firepower was amazing..........the police were outgunned until the full swat team arrived.

I'm not a ballistics expert either. What you are saying is "I am against assault rifles". Fair enough. I'm just trying to see what it is that the assault rifle has that you are against. To me, a semi auto rifle is a semi auto rifle. Like I said, the assault rifle has the ability to stick a bayonet in it. Maybe a larger magazine but that is about it. I want to know what you think I can achieve with an assault rifle that I cannot achieve with a hunting rifle.

Brian Carlton · #6 11-09-2008, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I'm not a ballistics expert either. What you are saying is "I am against assault rifles". Fair enough. I'm just trying to see what it is that the assault rifle has that you are against. To me, a semi auto rifle is a semi auto rifle. Like I said, the assault rifle has the ability to stick a bayonet in it. Maybe a larger magazine but that is about it. I want to know what you think I can achieve with an assault rifle that I cannot achieve with a hunting rifle.

I used "assault rifle" as an example. If it's a simple semi-auto rifle, I agree with you.

You tell me..........what can an assault rifle do that a hunting rifle cannot?

Questioning me about weapons isn't going to get you anywhere, because, self-admittedly, I'm no expert on them.

aklim · #7 11-09-2008, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

You tell me..........what can an assault rifle do that a hunting rifle cannot?

Questioning me about weapons isn't going to get you anywhere, because, self-admittedly, I'm no expert on them.

Problem is that the phrase "assault rifle" is used pretty loosely. If we used the wiki version, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
* An individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder.
* Capable of selective fire.
* Intermediate-power cartridge between pistol and traditional rifle.
* Ammunition is supplied from a detachable box magazine.
Your AK47 and M16 that you buy from the gun store is NOT an assault rifle. Why? See item 2. As to what an assault rifle can do that a hunting rifle cannot, I would say it capable of wasting ammo. It's great for throwing lead in a general direction but if you want to get really specific, it is a hard sell. Take an AK47 at 200 yards and it won't be as accurate as many hunting rifles. Say in the 50 yard range if you just want to throw lead at a target, the AK is your gun. That is why I said that I owned a couple of them. If the guy could pay cash, I wouldn't have owned them.

Now if you are against a rifle having auto fire mode or even burst fire, I agree. If you are against a rifle having an M203 grenade launcher. Sure. That is why I asked you, what it is specifically that you are against. If you want to own an AK or M16, I have no issue with it although those are what the unknowing call an "assault rifle". If you are saying that Citizen Joe should have the right to own a fully auto M16, AK or a 30 cal machine gun, that is different.