reply to post by PMNOrlando
Wow. I'm sure I will catch a whole heck of a lot of flack from the typical American Gun Owner, but I see nothing wrong with this list. I don't think
any civilian should have hi-capacity magazines, silencers, or Assault rifles.
Hand guns are still allowed, rifles and shotguns are still allowed, it just places limitations on those weapons. No semi-automatic rifles or shotguns
with magazine capacities greater than 5 is a great idea. For a hunter this is more than enough, for a civilian it just means you'll have to pace
yourself more with your shooting. Which to me is exactly what is needed in the sport of shooting anyways. I see lots of individuals hitting the range
blowing through 1000s of rounds for the sake of making noise, peppering the 50yd burm, with sheer luck making a hit on LARGE paper targets. What's
the point? You're not getting better at the sport, you are wasting ammunition and money. It's just silly.
I understand the desire to own assault weapons, they look cool yes but have no need in civilian hands. It's just silly to place a weapon made to kill
people, in the hands of a civilian. There are plenty of guns available that aren't on this list that are far beyond capable of self or home defense
if they needed to be. Heck a pointy stick is sufficient for home defense given you can use it.
5 rounds in a semi-auto shotgun is more than enough to defend your home or go hunting. If it isn't spend some more time at the rance. A revolver,
or semi auto pistol with a 10 round capacity is more than enough for personal defense outside of this plenty of competitive shooters have a round
I really don't see this as unreasonable. It's a compromise, Americans still have the right to own fire arms, but this is keeping the more dangerous
arms out of the general public. I can see this leading to a difference in safety.
Fire arms can be illegally obtained anywhere in the world, so I don't think this is being passed for the gang violence.
It does how ever make sense to take the ability of a disgruntled spouse, employee or civilian to walk into a gun store by assault weapons and hi
capacity magazines and go on a rampage.
I understand the stance on those who feel they have a right to own them, how ever there are those who abuse this right. It grows incredibly difficult
to regulate who gets what, or punish those that do such things when said items are so easily obtained.
I absolutely see no reason for a civilian to own a silencer. NONE, they were invented to conceal muzzle blast for the purpose of not being as easily
located or detected. That is not necessary for a civilian to own, in any instance. Hearing protection is used on a range at all times, so silencers
are moot. They are just unnecessary.
It's absolutely unnecessary for a civilian to own Anything on the list. They serve no purpose, that any other fire arm can do for civilian needs.
To be honest, I expected far more restrictions on Hand guns than we see with this list. It's actually rather fair in my eyes.