stop bringing up the founding fathers in gun arguments

[Lexical]

Originally Posted by Resheph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would like hard numbers on the number of women who stopped their attempted rapist using an assault weapon. After you get me those, find me the numbers on the women who stopped a rape with a handgun (which I'm all for).

There is a mental factor in less strict gun control as well that you are forgetting. People of criminal intent can be deterred by the very threat of an assault rifle being present and this is shown in the many pages of statistics posted.

Also, your argument was applied to the American police force a while back: 'There is no good reason for an officer to be armed with anything more than a hand gun. More advanced weaponry is for the SWAT team.' Then the 1997 LA bank heist happened and now almost all police cars have an assault rifle in the trunk.

Since you keep bringing up handguns though, here is an interesting graph you should look at. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us...esbyweapon.svg

[Resheph]

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is a mental factor in less strict gun control as well that you are forgetting. People of criminal intent can be deterred by the very threat of an assault rifle being present and this is shown in the many pages of statistics posted.

Also, your argument was applied to the American police force a while back: 'There is no good reason for an officer to be armed with anything more than a hand gun. More advanced weaponry is for the SWAT team.' Then the 1997 LA bank heist happened and now almost all police cars have an assault rifle in the trunk.

Handguns are a problem, but I refuse to argue against them. It's a futile attempt to do so and I can see legitimate reasons to have them. Police having automatic weapons in the trunk is not much of an issue. Anyone, police or not, walking around with an automatic rifle slung over their shoulder IS (unless they are summoned to the scene for a specific purpose, like SWAT).

I'm not against owning an automatic rifle in the home. Well, I am, but won't argue against it. It's your house and what's in it is none of my business. The governments take on it, well... I don't blindly follow anyone in politics, ever. But regarding the 'mental factor' thing... if you having a handgun doesn't discourage an attacker chances are nothing will.

[Lexical]

Originally Posted by Resheph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Handguns are a problem, but I refuse to argue against them. It's a futile attempt to do so and I can see legitimate reasons to have them.

Can you even argue completely against them if you can see legitimate reasons for having them?

Originally Posted by Resheph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Police having automatic weapons in the trunk is not much of an issue. Anyone, police or not, walking around with an automatic rifle slung over their shoulder IS (unless they are summoned to the scene for a specific purpose, like SWAT).

You are correct and it just so happens our current gun control laws already state that such things are illegal and very strictly enforced.

Originally Posted by Resheph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not against owning an automatic rifle in the home. Well, I am, but won't argue against it.

So you are against stricter gun control?

Originally Posted by Resheph [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

if you having a handgun doesn't discourage an attacker chances are nothing will.

I am sure there are plenty of people who are more scared of an assault rifle than they are of a 9mm.


From this post, you are not arguing anything and are against the stricter gun control. You are just turned off by the word "Assault Rifle" and therefore think they should be banned.

[Arrisard]

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are correct and it just so happens our current gun control laws already state that such things are illegal and very strictly enforced.

In point of fact, here in the great state of Ohio, it's 100% perfectly legit to walk around with your legally owned slung automatic rifle. YMMV if you live in some pussy state that hate muh rites.

[Lexical]

Originally Posted by Arrisard [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In point of fact, here in the great state of Ohio, it's 100% perfectly legit to walk around with your legally owned slung automatic rifle. YMMV if you live in some pussy state that hate muh rites.

Far enough, but the states with full preemption of all firearm laws like Ohio are generally less populated/rural. If you were walking around a metropolitan area with such a cannon around your back, then you would be surrounded with cop cars faster than you know it.