U.S gun enthusiasts

U.S gun enthusiasts.
I understand that you want to keep your right to bear arms and that guns can play a big part in self-defence.
But why do some of the people in your country argue they need fully automatic assault rifles to do so ?
Here in the UK you can legally own a shotgun with a license.
Surely a shotgun is enough to defend yourself from anyone who would do you harm in your own house or even a pistol to protect yourself in public.
Aren't the weapons that are available to purchase in the US complete overkill ?
>> Pic not related

Other urls found in this thread:

soundcloud.com/couchtruthing/lynch-factory
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Shall not be infringed you fucking faggot. The federal govt. has infringed on too many firearm rights already.

>waaah why do you need assault rifles??

why do you fucking care? if someone is going to go on a killing spree they damn will so assault rifles or not. this isnt cowadoody where people run around spray and praying.

That argument's retarded.
So it's ok to let the kind of person who would do a mass shooting have access to assault rifles as long as your government doesn't infringe on your gun rights.
I'm not saying guns should be banned.
Just the guns that you don't really need.

>they need fully automatic assault rifles
The term "assault rifle" was created by politicians to describe a rifle that looked menacing. There is no difference in function and they are not fully automatic.

It just interests me.
Not really bothered if you're killing each other I just don't see the reasoning behind it.
So you think it's just as easy to do a mass shooting with a shotgun than an assault rifle ?

>Just the guns that you don't really need
How do you know what I do and do not need?

You got it backwards. Assault rifles are any select fire mode combat rifle, "assault weapons" is the politicized phrasing meant to drum up fear.

Can you justify needing a fully automatic rifle ?

>Can you justify needing a fully automatic rifle ?
They're not fully automatic.

First off, I'm not anti-gun by any means. I'm just in favor of a little more sanity than we have now. Guns are dangerous because they're weapons, and I feel like people take the issue too lightly when they say we need fewer regulations, or more people should carry guns, etc. It's a VERY complicated issue.

The 2nd Amendment:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
This could be interpreted to mean the right to a militia shall not be infringed. Maybe it doesn't mean you get the biggest baddest gun, but the state militia can issue them the way the military lets you use weaponry while deployed, training, etc.

Or that "well-regulated" means that while you can keep and bear arms, there is a limit to the type of arms you can keep and bear.

>fully automatic

troll confirmed, everyone move along

>mass shooting have access to assault rifles

What' your point? You don't need an """"assault rifle"""" to go on a mass shooting.

You can do it with with 2 pistols, which might be an option since they can be easily concealed

ASS IS ALWAYSRELATED U FUCK

soundcloud.com/couchtruthing/lynch-factory

ITS NOT A GUN PROBLEM, ITS A NIGGER PROBLEM

a shotgun isn't as effective for removing people from office

>They're not fully automatic.
No.
You can get fully automatic weapons.
I'm not saying they all are, but the fact you can legally buy them is worrying.

Legit question:

Why do you need an auto- or semi-auto weapon? I'm not saying you don't. Just asking why YOU want or need one over a different kind of firearm.

You're why people shouldn't be allowed to have guns.

you can't without a license you retard, and an automatic rifle is as expensive as a car in the U.S

fag

OH YA! dont you understand something? protect against someone who wants to do you harm? like the government or police! And they have fully auto weapons thats why!

I think you're missing the point.
Why should you have access to military grade rifles ?

you're why the right to bear arms exists

You can only get a fully automatic or even burst fire weapon if it was both manufactured before 1986 and registered with the federal government prior to 1986. Full auto and bust fore weapons are not available to the public otherwise and there is a set amount of them on existence.

They are highly controlled,taxed and regulated. Breaking this law results in serious prison time.

...

You cant just buy an automatic weapon you stupid nigger

They are semi-automatic which means each time you press you fire one round

automatic implies spraying bullets

You can get class 3 weapons that are full auto but they are upwards of 20k dollars and you have to meet with the fucking atf to do it

no mass shooting in the last 20 years has been with a class 3


GET A LIFE BIN THAT KNIFE
you live in a dystopian 1984 hellhole

who the fuck are you to be giving us advice on living standards

Oh that's alright then.
Have you got an automatic rifle then ?

Further more I should add, the AR rifles you guys see and think are full auto are in fact semi-auto.

>semi-auto means one bullet per trigger pull. Just like a handgun.

Ignorance is the root cause of fear of guns. I am a liberal and vote democrat and I own guns. It's one of the main things I disagree with democrats on.

We declared independence so we wouldnt have to be like you spotted dicksuckers.

Militias. I may just be paranoid, but I think the recent massacre in Dallas could lead to more BLM activists becoming radicalized. The guy had a set of body armor and was trained, I'd rather not have a hunting rifle when going up against him.

Kinda missing the point.
The fact you can gain access to fully auto is bad enough.
Why the fuck do you need semi auto ?

>military grade

here's your (You)

To be fair, you can mod a semi-auto pretty easily by following instructions on the internet. Granted most mass-shooters don't have that kind of patience, but we'll probably see a class 3 spree eventually.

It is far to easy for the government to corrupt itself. US citizens should be able to restore order.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

Tears have you ever owned a rifle or semi auto gun, they fire 3 at a time, one st a time is not automatic

>Ignorance is the root cause of fear of guns.
No it's not.
I know what semi-auto means and I still think you shouldn't have access to them.
The main fear of guns is if they're in the wrong hands then a lot of people will die.
You don't need a semi auto rifle to protect yourself.

I doubt it. A semi auto is so much easier to shoot accurately then full auto. Instructions on the internet doesn't mean it works or is reliable.

I see what you're saying, but does that mean you'd want to open carry said firearm? Can't conceal a rifle, and just seeing people with guns everywhere doesn't do much to make me feel safer.

would you accept nobody needs a car that deives over 100mph?
nobody needs to be able to walk in any fast food store and consume 10,000 calories in one sitting?
Both of the above have effect on the rest of the population. More so than the amount of firearms available.

So yes, it is an illogical fear of firearms that puts them to the forefront. That, and you have no concept of the word "LIBERTY"

>> self-defence
>> defence

So youre essentially saying all non bolt action modern rifles are bad? You need semi-auto because threats dont always go down in one shot like the movies kid. So if in the unfortunate event someone attacks me in my home (which is the only place my rifle would be) I might need something other than a bolt action rifle.

Like general Cho?

The government is already corrupt and everyone knows it.
No one is going to rise up to fight it because they're scared.

bullshit
requiring background checks isn't "infringing" on your shit

All rights have responsibility and it doesn't say in the 2nd Amendment that the government can't regulate firearms.

unfortunately, OP didn't do proper research. Automatic weapons are NOT available for purchase for the general public. BUT if they ere it would be great, I would go RATATATATATATATATATATTATATATATATATATATATATTA during those BLM protests just for the keks.
-NillingKiggers

Lol semi auto is one shot at a time you idiot. The semi auto reffers to the fact that a round is shot and the next round loaded per triger pull. What dont you understand? Google it.

It comes down to trust. You don't trust other people enough to assume they aren't dangerous, so you want a gun. That's OK. I get it.

I don't trust other people enough to assume they can handle a gun responsibly when shit hits the fan, so I feel better when fewer people have them.

>> implying a .30-06 cartridge would not incapacitate a human being with a well-placed, center massed shot
>> implying all of WW1 and WW2 casualties were not entirely this

Sweet. You could use the same argument against corporations. The people could demand they play fair.

They're not immediately available to the public and there is a finite number available. It's a 6 month process with a background check including fingerprints and photos. There's a division within the ATF solely devoted to dealing with these items. A legally possessed machine gun has not been used in any crime on record.

>implying every shot is well placed center mass in real life scenarios.
>implying there isnt a wholr lot of places center mass that might not stop threat in one shot before that threat is able to attack
>implying you know what your talking about because you use the words center mass

So are you ok with ID checks, for which a small "poll fee" is charged, before allowing someone to vote?

>Why should you have access to military grade rifles ?
They aren't military grade.

I am not a God amongst men.
I have firearms mostly for sport and fun.
Others have their own reasons.
I trust them enough to make their own decisions.
I think you are very mistaken about my motivations.

When the worst things have happened around me, usually fires, those around me who could help, have. I have no innate (and irrational) fear of strangers.

>> implying your house is even nice enough to be broken into

However,using the going over 100 mph or shooting someone without reason would both result in loss of the car/gun and thus eliminating the need to use that function and making ownership pointless, so why again do you want to own the overkill/car?

>You don't need a semi auto rifle to protect yourself.
How many times have you been in a gun fight?

We are not talking about voting.

Also they were not entirely this. Google is your friend.

like you have

>Bill of Needs
And anyway, how would you want protect your home from Jamal and his gang of 5,6 or greater?

same reason i enjoy red meat, drinking, and in my youth, some drug use.

fucking liberty. i have enjoyed my life, i have had fun, and it was done without causing harm to others.

Projecting your own insecurities on others isn't healthy. You should seek professional help.

Zero. And in all zero of those times, I needed a rifle.

4 bedroom nice neighborhood. Its not a mansion but why is any home not nice enough to protect?

I don't sit and look out my window waiting for the chance to shoot someone. It's a hobby and some peace of mind. Whats wrong with that?

Or should I buy a katana because it's the only weapon I'll ever need?

We are talking about fundamental rights confirmed by the Bill of Rights, so it is relevant.

"If you would like to participate in KS elections, you'll need to register to vote with the Kansas Secretary of State. You can also submit your voter registration through the Kansas Division of Vehicles when you apply for a driver's license or ID, or change your address." It already requires your ID you fucking porch monkey. Are you even 18?

Well regulated militia means individuals having access to the same weapons the military has. The militia isnt formed to assist the govt., the militia is there to fight against the govt., should it mske a move toward tyranny.

>implying people weren't shot by a barrage of those cartridges.
>implying a .30+ caliber rifle cartridge is even appropriate to fire in a residential neighborhood.
High powered rifle cartridges will pass through people and potentially hit a bystander that could be outside of your house. If you were defending yourself at 100-1400 yards it's the clear choice.
Home defense should be based on how much damage and the odds of a kill shot in 1 trigger pull. Other than shotguns, any semi automatic action is the clear second choice.

Actually, you're attempting to compare regulation of firearms to disenfranchising voters, which is a false analogy.

A poll tax is un-Constitutional, background checks are not.

Ok, just making sure you don't have some experience that could enlighten us all. Thanks for confirming you don't have any anecdotal support.

You're not allowed to defend yourself with weapons, though.

>background checks are not.
Nice opinion you have there.

>anecdotal support
would be irrelevant

glad we're on the same page

A lot of people understand that automatic weapons are a problem, however about 240 years ago, some old dudes wrote some vague sentences about using your 5 min reload blunderbusses to protect yourself from Indians and bears and shit.

>Shall not infringe

Call of duty is fun so we should have automatic weapons irl

>would you accept nobody needs a car that deives over 100mph?
Yeah I would, if you're in a situation where driving 100mph could hurt someone other then you then it's wrong.
>nobody needs to be able to walk in any fast food store and consume 10,000 calories in one sitting?
No they don't, but when they do so its affecting them, their family and the hospitals who will end up treating them.
Also it's quite profitable for someone to be like that so I doubt anyone is going to do anything about it
>Both of the above have effect on the rest of the population. More so than the amount of firearms available.
True.
But you're missing the point, if someone has 10,000 calories a sitting what excuse do they have ?
If someone is ran over at 100mph what excuse does the driver have ?
Having an overkill weapon for protection is the same as having a car that goes over 100mph.
It's not necessary except a gun is designed to kill and car is designed for travel.

you're welcome to show me the court case where background checks have been struck down as un-Constitutional

I'll wait

do you believe that a man that has murdered before should have access to a gun?

And thats great,however,guns have the potential to harm others unlike red meats and drinking,but maybe you are smart enough and know what you're talking about,but the mass shooter isn't, think of gun control as more of a sacrifice and not a punishment to make the world a better place,besides drugs can cause harm to others as well,families can be torn apart and leave you broke.

>It's not necessary except a gun is designed to kill and car is designed for travel.

user., don't let these fucking gunfags trap you into an argument where they're avoiding the actual topic, which is guns.

It's a common ruse in these discussions.

>would be irrelevant
just like your opinion

Maybe what they meant by "keep and bear arms" was a typo and was supposed to read "keep and bare arms"

depends what the opinion is

also, not the user you're arguing with

I am pro-background checks and closing the gun show loophole

It just seems like many (not all), but a lot of gun enthusiasts imagine they'll be in some scenario where they'll need it to fight off a threat that, as pro-gun folks are quick to point out, is really, really, really unlikely to happen. That means a lot of people carrying weapons who don't need to be, but are looking for a chance to use it.

Anecdotally, there's a guy who comes into my work a lot who always has on a t-shirt with a different pro-gun bumper sticker-type quote on it ("the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," etc.), and has a holstered pistol on his belt. This same guy has demonstrated a lack of understanding regarding firearms (didn't know what "caliber" meant), government, and he spouts off racist shit all the time, which leads me to believe he'd LOVE a chance to shoot a black person. These are the kinds of people I see giving other gun owners a bad name, and why I think there needs to be more regulation of guns.

Tru.
>MUH SECOND AMMENEDMENT
A pistol and maybe semis are all you need to defend yourself. Autos r unneeded and only cause problems right guys?

Let me put it this way, OP.

I'm one of those guys who agrees with you entirely.

But I own a fully automatic rifle, can do a conversion of most Ak-47s and AR-15s, own combat shotguns, have several handguns with hugely extended magazines, and I have drones and turrets designed to accept "paintball" guns.

Why?

Because when guns are finally outlawed in this country, only fucking psychopaths who collect a vast number of guns like they're collecting canned goods for the apocalypse will have guns, and frankly I'd like to be able to weed some of them out by handing them a gun on the black market that will take their hands off if they try to fire it.

Also, because fuck them.

I disagree, but part of the problem is that the 2nd Amendment is a little vague.

Because the world is in a state of un-rest, and more than ever the united states are slipping towards a shitty slope. I personally don't think anything too big will come from it, but you don't THINK you'll have to walk across rusty nails and broken glass everyday, doesn't mean you don't wear shoes.

tl;dr - you never know what a guy trying to hurt you is going to be using, and if he has a big stick, you need a big stick.

you avoided the "needs a car that can" part

i know it's profitable for the food seller, but my insurance goes up because of it

my guns must be very special, they were designed purely for target shooting. being able to kill someone is just a side effect.

all bullshit aside, you are assuming that guns are single use items, and that is for killing. of the 300+ million firearms currently in the USA, how many are used for that purpose? statistically, about zero. it is an irrational fear from the media that created and continues this trend.

Switzerland has no issue with rifles.
/thread

The antigun fags tend to spew off inccorect and misleading information. Like the faggot earlier that said semi auto means more than one bullet at a time or the people that seem to think full auto wealons arent already illegal asside from the very few existing guns that are extremely hard to legally posses.

>what is Judicial Review?

Fucking gunfags turn the barrel 360° and pull the trigger do us all a favour…

>the gun show loophole
What is this gun show loophole you speak about? I have an FFL, and I have to give a background check whether I'm in my store, or set up at a gun show.

AR-15 is a classic example of a gun that would be much more user friendly to defends one's home as opposed to a shotgun

Maybe it's inaccurate, but you all tend to jump on the pettiest shit sometimes.

The real argument is finding middle ground where let's face it the crazies don't get ahold of weapons and shoot up shit and people.

Switzerland is filled with liberals who wouldn't harm a soul.

Bc I like to shoot automatic rifles and if you take them away then I cant shoot them god dammit

......