Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Please gun supporters - explain to me once and for all why you need an automatic weapon"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So even an honest question gets disgusting answers. We're doomed.[/quote] Disgusting answers include pointing out that the question is invalid, as automatic weapons are illegal?[/quote] Different poster here. That's a valid answer, but still misses the point. Those semi-automatic rifles can still be fired quickly and are very powerful. People who don't know the difference are CALLING them automatic weapons, but they MEAN semi-automatic rifles, and they seem to be the weapons of choice for those who want to kill a lot of people fast.[/quote] So what was the point? If the question is factually invalid, then no intelligent response can be provided.[/quote] The point is you can correct the OP's facts and still address the actual intent of his question, which is: Why do you need a semi-automatic rifle? [/quote] Ah, so only now is the true issue revealed. If that's the question, then the answer is simple. There is no need to justify any exercise of one's 2nd Amendment rights. [/quote] That's not an answer. Your rights are one thing. The specific manner in which you choose (or are allowed to) exercise your rights are another. If you say, "I need a semi-automatic rifle so I can shoot a lot of people at a bar," this would not be a legitimate exercise of your second amendment rights. If you say, "I need a a semi-automatic rifle because I need to target practice," that would be a better answer, but still not a good answer because you'd be describing a want rather than a need. So the question remains: Why do you NEED a semi-automatic rifle?[/quote] NP here. I think that your analysis is flawed. It's akin to asking someone why they "need" a website to exercise first amendment rights when they have a pen and paper, in furtherance of an argument that the government should ban websites based on content of speech. [/quote] Certain content is in fact banned. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater and you can't set up a website that provides detail planning for overthrow of the US Government. You also can't buy a fully automatic weapon. Maybe you can come up with a legitimate need for one, but so far the courts have not overturned that ban. Until 2004, there was a ban on semi-automatic rifles. It was not overturned by the courts, it expired. That ban could be reinstated, and if it were, there would certainly be a discussion about why you would need such a weapon. Until Scalia died, the Supreme Court would have certainly overturned it. If Clinton is elected and gets a democratic congress too, that ban could come back for good.[/quote] I'm afraid that you're mistaken re: the law that expired in 2004: it did not ban semi-automatic rifles (which have been used for hunting, etc., since the late 19th century). The law that expired in 2004 banned a narrow subset of semi-auto weapons, which is why it was widely derided--in effect, it banned "scary-looking" guns, while allowing ownership of functionally similar guns. Your revised first amendment analogy is getting more compelling now that you've moved away from the "need" framework. I agree that the widely recognized "public safety" limitations to the first amendment serve as a model for reasonable additional regulation on firearms. However, a ban on all semi-automatic weapons is a non-starter--they simply have too many legitimate applications. IMO, people seriously interested in meaningful gun control ought focus on background checks for all transfers, criminal liability for negligent transfer/storage, and similar measures designed to keep firearms out of the wrong hands. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics