Why do people other than military/police feel the need to have a machine/submachine gun/assualt rifles?
November 25th, 2009 by eranio
Really what the heck does a citizen need with a machine/submachine gun/assault rifle? I can understand a historical war collecter wanting them but nobody else obviously needs them since we have militay branches and law enforcement to protect us. If Hawkins’ (The Omaha mall shooter) relative didn’t have the AK47 to begin with there probably wouldn’t have as many people killed.
Posted in Military Rifles
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Just getting clear on definitions:
Sub-machine gun: Short, low-power cartridge, fully-automatic firearms, fed by externally-inserted magazines (including drums). Primarily used by paratroops and as a backup weapon for infantry providing high-volume fire support at close quarters, such as house-to-house sweeps, search-and-destroy operations. etc. Handy for paratroops as they are short and compact for heavily-loaded air-dropped personnel. Also favored by civilian police SWAT units for concentrated fire. Examples include the M3 “grease gun,” the Thompson .45, the Uzi, the Swedish K, the H&K MP5, and the M2 carbine. These are select-fire or fully automatic, and cannot be owned by civilian personnel, unless they have a Federal Class Ill firearms license. No legally owned firearm in this genre has ever been involved in a crime in this country. Semiautomatic versions of these firearms may legally be owned by civilians.
Machine gun: These are fully-automatic weapons designed to provide a continuous field of fire for troop suppression to cover advances or to protect a hardened position. Also used on troop carriers, tanks, helicopters, and jeeps/Hummers. They are either belt-fed or canister-fed, and are capable of a high sustained rate of fire with high-powered cartridges. Examples include the M60 (7.62 NATO cartridge), the Browning .50 (.50-caliber very-high-power) and the Browning .30 (.30-06 cartridge). These may not be owned by civilians without a Class III license, unless the firearm has been certified de-commissioned (rendered totally unable to fire or capable of being rebuilt to fire).
Assault rifle: Medium-length, medium-power cartridge, fully-automatic or select-fire firearms, magazine-fed, designed for infantry troops. In modern armies, these have largely supplanted the infantry rifle, as they provide nearly as good accuracy with far higher fire volume. In some cases, they mount, in addition, a grenade launcher under the barrel. Examples include the M-16, the Chinese or Russian Kalashnikov AK-47, and the Stoner weapons system. These, again, may not be owned by civilians without a Class Ill license. Some semi-automatic models of these rifles exist, and may legally be owned by civilians. The M-16 in the semi-auto version is marketed as the AR-15.
The longer "definition list" can be found here:
http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/Dietrick/a_firearms_definition_list.htm
How to Own Class III Weapons Basic Guidelines:
http://www.westernfirearms.com/wfc/default?set=02
And of course, you must first live in a state that allows ownership of Class III weapons before considering a permit.
http://www.westernfirearms.com/wfc/default?set=06
—
How many people can afford these? How many actually own them?
I think you think a bunch of people are running around with these when in fact, they are not.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
The answer is because they can. Why do people drive SUV’s that get 10 MPG? Why do people have 10 kids? Why do people do drugs?
Trust me, the AK47 doesn’t kill nearly as many people as lets say a 9mm.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Happiness is a warm gun(yes it is).
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
Why the heck do I need assault weapons? I need them to enhance my gun collection.
The mall shooter did not have an assault weapon. He used a semi-auto version of the AK-47. If he wanted to kill more people, he might have used a gasoline bomb or other explosive.
Believe it or not, the military and police are not around to protect individuals, they are there to protect society. Do not believe me? Try suing the local police for not protecting you during a mugging and that is the answer you will get. Your protection is actually your own responsibility.
Ranb
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
1. The police don’t protect US. They protect society. Big difference – at their core, the police are crime historians, figuring who did something only after a crime has been committed. It’s YOUR responsibility to keep yourself safe and alive, not anyone else’s.
2. The Second Amendment guarantees my right to keep and bear arms for any reason. "Need" never enters the equation.
3. The firearm Hawkins used was not a machine gun. Get your facts and your terminology straight.
4. If the "no firearms" signs posted at all the mall doors were ignored by honest citizens and not just by the shooter, there also would have been fewer dead that day.
Thoughts?
November 25th, 2009 at 7:42 am
1. because we can
2. it’s our right
3. If we didn’t have them legally somebody else would have them illegally.
4. don’t tell me if the kid didn’t have an AK not as many people would have been killed. Virginia tech was done with a .22 handgun and 9mm handgun and he killed twice as many if not more people.