It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help me understand why people need assault rifles to protect themselves

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

That golf ball would probably hurt more then a bullet lol




posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

I think the more important question is why anyone would care if you had one type or another,a gun is a gun.

A knife is a knife.

I have s set of ceremonial Spears hanging on my wall that are real,and incredibly lethal in close quarters and I have a Swiss Army knife I always carry with me,they are both bladed weapons so there is really no difference.

same dynamic applies to cars,why have so many kinds,when all you need is one good reliable multi-purpose one?

Because people like to have freedom of choice,which brings us back to those pesky guns again,which happen to preserve that right to freedom of choice and expression.


Really if you simply struck down the word assault and simply used the word rifle then there would be no debate,maybe it is important to ask why some people want them referred to as assault weapons in the first place,it seems like an intentionlly designated term with an artificial origin,one intended to pigeon-hole specific types of guns for a later subversive purpose,like targeted gun control.

I used to use guns,and it is always nice to have as much ammo as you can hold in your weapon for practical purposes, and as far as calibers go, you can get "Target rifles" and "Sporting rifles" in the same calibers as "assault rifles".

The debate is really about magazine capacity,how much ammo your gun can hold,and really who would ever be concerned about that,we know deer and bears dont care,and we dont care if criminals care, so EXACTLY who cares so much they are trying to force artificially catalysed changes upon a Nation?Obviously it is a homeland concern so this leaves only one option.

My final answer is, ask yourself who coined a specific type of gun an "assault" rifle and who has tried to attatch some special meaning to that terminology,and for what subversive reason.





edit on 5-6-2014 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Thisbseth

When I was a kid I was taught the lethality of egg sized rocks, I learned by hunting with them .

I will tell you that an egg sized rock has lethal potential from close range, and you can carry a lot of them with you.

I used to hold three in my reload hand and one in my throwing hand and run at pumpkins on a fencepost and practice throwing them as hard as I could on the run at the Pumpkins,let me tell you you can quickly learn how to do a lot of damage in no time at all.

If you name them and paint their names on them they are probably ot considered weapons in most jurisdictions.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
It's rather simple really OP. It's human nature.

People that love and enjoy guns naturally want the best they can get. The whole protect my family blah blah, is just a line of bull. I love guns and wish i had an AR-15. Why? Because they are freaking awesome. I have a .22, does the same thing. Point, shoot, bang, but its boring.

It's the same with any interest that people have. Take car enthusiast for example. Yeah they can drive a Ford Escort, but they really want a Lamborghini. Why? Same answer, because they are freaking awesome.

Your always going to have people that think other people's interest are stupid and are going to question them. Everyone really needs to just STFU and leave everyone else alone.

Spend your time enjoying the things in life that you enjoy instead of letting the things that you don't ruin your day. Let people believe in what ever religion they want. Let people love who they want. Let people be happy with the things that make them happy. We all live a very short time on this earth. Enjoy it with the things that put a smile on your face. Maybe meddling and being a sour puss about everyone else business is what makes you happy. If that's the case then forget what I just typed and enjoy the rest of your thread.




posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I have always wondered this myself! I think it's an insecurity thing. They're paranoid and lack self confidence.
Why does a man who never hunts or drives bush roads or goes bogging jack his truck up 12" and put 44" tires on it?! Cause his dick is little and he feels like it will impress his friends and women.
Who really knows, I personally find it pathetic. Like taking a knife to a fist fight. Buy a weapon you can use in multiple situations. Not one meant for mowing down whatever f'n "war" you feel is coming your way. It looks cowardly.
I hunt. I own 3 rifles and only one is semiautomatic. I can put one between someone's eyes anywhere from point blank to 300yards. I am confident in my abilities so therefore I don't need an automatic weapon. Because when this "war" ever comes to my doorstep. I won't be home, I'll be where I can't be seen gaining the upper hand. I also know 300+ men with the same mentality who are more than capable of the same.
I'm sure I'll get bashed, but, those who may on make their insecurity more prevalent.
Simply, my opinion. You Americans confuse me!



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

You do realize that your argument is flawed, don't you? AR-15s and MP-5s are NOT assault rifles because they are semi-automatic. Assault rifles are those that are selective fire, in that, the operator can switch between semi-auto and full-auto/3-rd burst. The AR-15s that most folks have can only be fired in semi and NOT in full-auto/3-rd burst. You need to spend a lot of money to get a Class III license and then shell out a heckuva lot more hard earned money to buy a full auto rifle.

I know a lot of folks think "AR" stands for Assault Rifle but it actually stands for Armalite Rifle.

I mean, the AR, in my opinion, isn't really a high caliber rifle. The .223 round is quite small when compared to the venerable 7.62 round (my absolute favorite). One of the reasons people enjoy the .223 is that the ammunition is light to carry and also has a light kick to it. You can carry a lot of it and it doesn't hurt your shoulder when you fire a hundred rounds at the range.

I'm not a big fan of the AR and call them "Barbie Guns" because they accessorize easily. No, give me a Garand, M14 or Mosin...Those are fun to shoot and when your done, you know you've put some lead down range.

That said, the AR-15 is a fine weapon for home defense as it is easy to maneuver inside and it's a tack driver...very intuitive to aim and whatever you put that red dot on is going down. Take care!



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moelson
I have always wondered this myself! I think it's an insecurity thing. They're paranoid and lack self confidence.
Why does a man who never hunts or drives bush roads or goes bogging jack his truck up 12" and put 44" tires on it?! Cause his dick is little and he feels like it will impress his friends and women.
Who really knows, I personally find it pathetic. Like taking a knife to a fist fight. Buy a weapon you can use in multiple situations. Not one meant for mowing down whatever f'n "war" you feel is coming your way. It looks cowardly.
I hunt. I own 3 rifles and only one is semiautomatic. I can put one between someone's eyes anywhere from point blank to 300yards. I am confident in my abilities so therefore I don't need an automatic weapon. Because when this "war" ever comes to my doorstep. I won't be home, I'll be where I can't be seen gaining the upper hand. I also know 300+ men with the same mentality who are more than capable of the same.
I'm sure I'll get bashed, but, those who may on make their insecurity more prevalent.
Simply, my opinion. You Americans confuse me!


"I am confident in my abilities so therefore I don't need an automatic weapon."


you are confusing the issue,very,very few automatic weapons are available in the U.S. i know of no one that owns one.All I have ever seen outside of the military are semi.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Myth Number 1. Americans cannot own FULLY AUTO-MATIC AR's. We can only own SEMI-AUTOMATIC AR's. One shot for each pull of the trigger. Not a "spray of gunfire". Most AR are heavy on the "add ons" laser, lights, sites, etc etc. It's one of the most accessorie laden firearms on the market. Tons of after market stuff for the AR platform.

With that said, I own three. If I hunted, it would make excellent hunting weapon. I own them because I am a self admitted firearm nut. No if an armed group or a single person came at me armed with an AR, I'm gonna leave the Glock in the holster and meet fire with fire. Why even ask this question in the first place? I would imagine if you have a hobby you don't buy the cheap, crappy stuff for enjoying your hobby. I would imagine you buy the latest, greatest stuff on the market.

Two of my AR's are 223. and one is 308. now that bad boy's got some stopping power at a distance. Main reason I own them is BECAUSE I HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TOO. Nothing else need be said. Ive got firearms that make the AR look like a toy. One's with more power, more distance, more rounds.







a reply to: Thecakeisalie


edit on 5-6-2014 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I own a Mosin-Nagant and nothing comes close at 400 to 600 yards. Mine has the scope, the old school scope, side mount. This firearm can pierce body armor at 500 yards. No AR at 223. can do that. At about 300 to 350 yards I aint gonna miss with this firearm. Last of the Dragoons a really fine made rifle, that packs a mean punch.



a reply to: Feltrick



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: openyourmind1262

I love mine as well and always glad to meet someone that appreciates the old world charm of the Mosin. I own three, not because I need three, but because I couldn't stop at just one! Great rifles and the 1936 Tula Sniper is perfect for hunting.

Give me a rifle made of steel and wood any day...



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
I own a Mosin-Nagant and nothing comes close at 400 to 600 yards. Mine has the scope, the old school scope, side mount. This firearm can pierce body armor at 500 yards. No AR at 223. can do that. At about 300 to 350 yards I aint gonna miss with this firearm. Last of the Dragoons a really fine made rifle, that packs a mean punch.



a reply to: Feltrick



sick.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarsIsRed

originally posted by: openyourmind1262
I own a Mosin-Nagant and nothing comes close at 400 to 600 yards. Mine has the scope, the old school scope, side mount. This firearm can pierce body armor at 500 yards. No AR at 223. can do that. At about 300 to 350 yards I aint gonna miss with this firearm. Last of the Dragoons a really fine made rifle, that packs a mean punch.



a reply to: Feltrick



sick.


Fully agree, the Dragoon is a sick rifle! I wish I could find one!



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Assault rifles are not what is being used. Assault rifles are fully automatic weapons and pretty much don't exist anywhere in the United States, unless one has a very special license, and even then there are severe restrictions.

This is going to be long, but I am going to explain it as well as I am able.

The guns that you are referring to are semi-automatic weapons, such as the AR-15, that are used in a number of cases. The first and foremost is that the truth is that, in some cases, semi-automatics aren't really necessary for reload purposes. A person that is moderately skilled and comfortable with his or her weapon can reload it fast enough. Not necessarily enough to compete with a semi-automatic rifle, but it can be comparable in many cases. I'm telling you this to let you know that a moderately skilled person can just reload fast enough to be relatively comparable and that there is no real reason to ban them in the first place, because the main thing that one is trying to eliminate (amount of bullets able to be sprayed everywhere) by banning these guns is basically a non-issue, because when seconds count, the semi-automatics are better, but not enough to make that big of a difference in murder cases or mass shootings. On the flip side, this would also probably not make that big of a difference in self-defense cases against other human beings.

On the other hand, there are situations where every fraction of a second counts, like when you're hunting wild boar, and in those situations, they literally save lives. Wild boars are fast, big, and they have really tough hides. Just like any animal with that is like that, such as bears, one-shot-one-kill is not really a valid philosophy, especially when they tend to travel in packs. These animals are a fast growing problem, they are incredibly dangerous, and, like I said, they tend to travel in packs and are hard to kill. Every fraction of a second counts, and there is more of a need than just for hunters; those that live in areas where wild boars roam are effected by this as well.

Much of the legislation that you see against "assault" weapons these days is just a giant wash because the politicians involved don't actually even take enough time to learn what they're talking about. In their ignorance, they're mostly just banning cosmetic pieces, or they're making laws that are so wide and arcing that they are essentially taking away the right to own a gun altogether.

The single most important use for semi-automatics has to do with those of us in the most vulnerable within the population. It's the women and elderly that need guns for home defense, it's the people that live long ways off from police and/or live in areas filled with drug addicts like meth heads and pillpoppers, it's those people that need those guns the most. And the reason why has nothing to do with defending against multiple attackers for the reload time.

It has everything to do with kickback.

Even modern versions of your traditional shotgun and rifle are horrific when it comes to kickback while the semi-automatic weapons tend to be made to absorb the shock a lot better. When you're talking about a woman living alone or an elderly person, those kinds of things are important because they are easy targets, and they need to be able to fire a gun that won't break their collar bone or throw them through a wall the first time around.

And while I mention women and the elderly in particular, I won't discriminate against men. There are plenty of men that, because of size or other factors, simply cannot handle your traditional shotgun or rifle. I mean, the idea of my younger brother, who's 5'8 and 130 soaking wet, handling a 12 gauge shotgun even sounds ludicrous. I'm not necessarily saying that he absolutely can't; I'm just saying that he has to be able to position it perfectly and precisely to be able to do so without risking severe injury to himself, and during a time where he has to defend himself quickly and efficiently, when even a fraction of an inch can make all the difference, it's a bar that's waaay too high.

I, on the other hand, can't handle shotguns and rifles at all. As in, they're generally made too heavy for me to even hold them right, let alone effectively wield them. It's flat out dangerous for me to do so in most cases.

Another thing that I'd like to add is that modern hand guns are, a lot of the time, semi-automatic, and the ones that aren't, like revolvers, generally have major kickback. Again, it's the same scenario. I'm somebody in a very vulnerable part of the population. Eliminating semi-automatic weapons essentially denies me the right to a gun and leaves me in the hands of pepper spray, which has a major risk of blowback, or tasers, which are notorious to misfire and are basically useless against multiple or very large attackers.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

In my opinion, 'need' doesn't factor into the equation. Nor does anyone's definition of practicality. The simple fact is, we all can and do own things that we do not necessarily need and that others might find impractical. Do I need a Corvette that can run 150mph? No. Does it serve any practical purpose for me? No. But I can buy it nonetheless and yeah, I'd probably buy the damn thing if I could afford it. Does an AR-15 fit that category? Perhaps. I'm sure that many have a specific purpose in mind. Others own them simply because they can. These two reasons, and everything in between, are perfectly legitimate, as far as I'm concerned.

That being said, I think they can have a role to play in home defense. They make much more sense for those who are recoil sensitive than a shotgun and virtually anyone will be more accurate and therefore arguably safer with any type of rifle than with a handgun. They're obviously faster for followup shots than a manual action rifle or pump shotgun, and they do not suffer from ammunition limitations of a fixed magazine design that only holds five or six rounds. The latter won't be a problem in most cases, but when it is, its a BIG problem.

Not only that, but there's virtually no fundamental difference between an AR-15, AK-47 or similar type rifle to a typical semi-automatic hunting rifle such as a Remington 7400, with one exception: magazine capacity. That being said, many semi-auto hunting rifles have detachable magazines, and there's no reason why a 10, 15 or 20 round magazine couldn't be made for one; right now there's just no market for it. Furthermore, those semi-auto hunting rifles generally chamber a MUCH more powerful cartridge than .223 or even 7.62x39. As it turns out, those 'assault rifle' rounds can be underwhelming and, in the case of .223/5.56, often illegal because of it, when used for hunting deer or larger game.

Given that all of these rifles are semi-automatic, I don't think it makes much sense to ban one and allow the other all based upon aesthetic properties, and that's exactly what an AWB does. It simply makes no logical sense. If there's an issue here, it is, as someone above pointed out, a question of magazine capacity. I personally do not believe that there should be a restriction imposed, but its a debate that makes somewhat more sense than one based almost entirely around the fact that something looks scary to some people.
edit on 5-6-2014 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Why is that sick? It's no different than a motorcycle guy saying " I got new pipes and that baby is fast" Was there a need to get new pipes? No. There was a want to get new pipes. My hobby is firearms. Why ? because I like them. I see them for no more or no less than what they are "objects". Some folks into cycles, some folks into cars, some folks into knives, There's no difference in my statement about the Mosin than any of the other examples. Those of you that are'nt into guns, how about leave us that are alone about it. I mean we don't come and throw rocks at your cycles and the like because we don't understand.





a reply to: MarsIsRed



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   
Given that I've taken an oath to defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic, and an M-16 is what I was trained to do that with, BY THE GOVERNMENT, I don't see why I can't have one, and I think I have earned one. (I don't have one, but I don't wanna lose the right, just so the distracted citizens of america can have an ILLUSION of more security.)

Little note: I don't know if this is completely accurate, but one of the reasons a 5.56 is used, at least I was taught by superiors in the military, is that it isn't meant to kill... It's meant to injure, thus taking the target out effectively, as well as tie up any resources used to evacuate the wounded. 2-3 for the price of 1, and I'm not even talking about lethality.

Another little note: I don't know if this is completely accurate, but let's take Iraq for example... Each family has a defend rifle, for the most part. They kinda freak out about pistols. I don't know why, but was told that it's just because they're not accustomed to them. I think they're prolly even more "dangerous" than rifles because for one, they can be concealed easier, and two, if it's legally concealed, it doesn't pose as big of a deterrent.

Also,I know I can trust me, and I know that plenty of others are not trustworthy. If you don't personally want one, why not?
edit on 6/6/2014 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/6/2014 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/6/2014 by japhrimu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:12 AM
link   
i spent 20 years in the army and am very familiar with actual military weapons. it's close kin the civilian AR is as comfortable as mole skin to me. i certainly am already proficient in both marksmanship with it and the tactics should it come to needing to employ it in self defense or any of the other reasons the founders felt i needed to be armed for.

while an automatic version might be fun to shoot it is wasteful. i have never used an actual M16 on automatic or even burst except at the range to help use up ammo at the end of a range day so it didn't have to be inventoried and turned back in. semiautomatic fire is aimed precision fire. why do with thirty what can be done with one?

even automatic fire isn't that useful. it's primary function is suppressive fire except with crew served weapons. that is it is used to force the enemy to stay down and limiting thier movements and effective fire. sure you can spray a group in a room or tight group but a short barrelled shot gun does that better in close quarters.

automatic fire in most conditions is the sign of an amateur or a wanna be.

BTW the AR-15 as much as i like them is no different that a certain hunting rifle which actually is semi automatic and fires faster than the ar. it just lacks the scary looking pistol grip, compensator and bayonet lug. the mini14 is almost never the target of the gun grabbers but it is every bit as capable of mayhem as the AR15. it just looks like a hunting rifle. but there are "military" furniture kits you can add to it. picture a hunting rifle and cute fluffy bunnehs...then swap out the furniture making no changes to the capacity or functionality and oh my gosh it's an eeeeeevil assault rifle. it's too dangerous for you to have! aaaaargh! aaaaargh! Ban it! it looks scary! aaaargh!
edit on 6-6-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: grammar



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
For the sake of this thread,

I need help in understanding the need for some to arm themselves to the teeth. A well placed shot from a pistol has the same stopping power as a spray and pray from an automatic weapon, but without the death.

So please enlighten me, I want to know the logic behind the purchase of these weapons.




For the sake of this thread... I do not think you have a clue to what it is you want to understand...

First who has an automatic weapon to do your "spray and pray"? Since no one has this unless they have a class 3 firearm license your whole post is invalid.

Have you even shot a pistol... lol well place shot? give me a break....

So when you say pistol are you talking a six shooter or a semi auto?

The bottom line is superior firepower wins. If you want to use your .22 six shooter as your defense weapon so be it, but you better be good and more importantly lucky. I'm not in a ring where everything needs to be fair, I want it to be so unfair in my favor that by sheer firepower alone I'll be the guy that walks away.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 03:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Moelson

Who really knows, I personally find it pathetic. Like taking a knife to a fist fight. Buy a weapon you can use in multiple situations.


What do you bring to a knife fight? I bring a gun, I just hate all that ass grabbing knife swishing stuff, I would rather just shoot the guy and get it over with....

Is that confusing too?



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 04:13 AM
link   

[A well placed shot from a pistol has the same stopping power as a spray and pray from an automatic weapon, but without the death.



WTF are you talking about? My go to pistol is a glock forty caliber. I've got hollow points in it at the moment. A well placed shot (chest level and up)from that will kill a man as fast as any other gun.

If the Jews in Germany had these evil "assault weapons" there would be no holocaust.
By owning these "assault weapons" we are preventing the next holocaust. You're welcome.



new topics




 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join