Quantcast

Rave this if you are for banning assault rifles.

Carol 2012/12/17 18:22:38
Related Topics: Gun, Rifle, Assault, Shooting
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Do you really need this gun for the shooting range?
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Andrew 2012/12/17 20:46:26 (edited)
    No
    Andrew
    +52
    Tell me, what is different about these rifle than any other rifle? They employ the use of lightwieght metals and polymer. They shoot the same ammunition. They are semi-automatic, but so are many hunting rifles. They can be fitted with long range scopes, but so can any old hunting rifle. What makes them "assault rifles"? The way they look? Because they shoot bullets? Because they can kill efficiently? So can all hunting rifles! You aren't gonna stop with these, Carol and you know it. You are just STARTING with these!

    Don't lie to us! It ain't any of your business. The problem isn't the guns, but the nuts behind them and the most dangerous person with a firearm is a Progressive (Regressive) in a position of POWER! HITLER, STALIN, MAO, POL POT were ALL Progressives (Regressives) who enslaved people and then used the POWER of the GUN to ELIMINATE ALL those who stood as a threat to their POWER!!!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • olylift 2013/01/03 02:47:11
    No
    olylift
    +1
    I need it for when the government starts shooting at my family and friends because people like you said I don't need guns at all.
  • Wally-Molon Labe! 2012/12/28 21:56:07
    No
    Wally-Molon Labe!
    +1
    Why should our corrupt government, UN soldiers, and law enforcement have decent weapons of self defense?

    The second amendment was about Americans being able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. What the hell do you think we have now? And now the big push is to disarm us. How convenient.
  • phil.ol... Wally-M... 2013/01/08 08:19:30
    phil.olding.3
    +1
    "Weapons of self defense"

    I'm glad someone besides me understands that arms like the AR-15, which are particularly good for killing people, are also particularly good at killing people in self-defense - which is what they were designed for, and what our military uses them for.
  • JustMe 2012/12/26 12:52:15
    No
    JustMe
    that is just a way to open a pandora's box
  • ninja19 2012/12/26 12:44:11 (edited)
    Yes
    ninja19
    +1
    I quit i'm sick of defending myself my point because it just seems like i'm getting gained up on for voicing my opinion on something that should have never happend in the first place for all you gun users that have so much to say me but never coming up with an option you just don't want your Toys taken away so let's hear it what should gov do to stop horrific acts like this from taking place again?
  • Wally-M... ninja19 2012/12/28 22:09:44
    Wally-Molon Labe!
    I am so happy you asked that question.

    Our government knowingly allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor. How many innocent people killed? Reason. To get Americans emotionally involved in going to war.

    Gulf of Tonkin. Non event created to get America involved in the war against North Vietnam.

    911. Planned and staged event to create the bogus war on terror. Reason. To get Americans emotionally involved in finding Osama Bin Laden and invading Afghanistan. Additional reason. To get Americans fearful and accepting of an erosion of our rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

    Mass shootings. Reason. To attack our second amendment and get Americans emotionally involved in gun control. The goal. To disarm us according to the UN and Globalist agenda so then we will be defenseless.

    Do you want freedom or slavery? Think about that carefully.
  • ninja19 Wally-M... 2012/12/28 23:11:29
  • Wally-M... ninja19 2012/12/29 00:30:27
    Wally-Molon Labe!
    We all do. But it is too late for hoping and wishing. Our controlled corrupt government is determined to destroy the America we love. It is time for all patriotic Americans to, and I am sorry to tell you this because you are so young, prepare yourself and your friends and loved ones to fight for what you want. Our ancestors wanted freedom badly enough to take on the most powerful military of the day. Should we be willing to do anything less?
  • Adakin ... ninja19 2013/01/03 18:29:16
  • phil.ol... ninja19 2013/01/04 23:13:52
    phil.olding.3
    Of course. Making more laws won't do that. We banned murder, and we see how that turned out. We made it punishable by life in prison or death - capitol punishment - and we see that even that still doesn't work.
  • phil.ol... ninja19 2013/01/04 23:12:56
    phil.olding.3
    Putting words on paper, making more laws, that remove the rights from law-abiding citizens, will NOT stop criminals from doing things like this again.

    Moreover, I will happily fight you to your death for my rights. I'm an Iraq/Afghanistan vet. I went to war to fight for the rights of Americans. I've fought people bigger, badder, and better armed than you. I stand before you, a free man.

    We protect our money with guns. We protect our children with words on paper, words on signs, and good intentions. Professional tip: THE MONEY IS SAFE!

    Having someone present, who is armed and trained, will make it possible for that person to stop an active shooter. Putting more words on paper won't do anything.

    The "assault weapon ban" that is being discussed won't remove any guns from the hands of anyone, period. The only way to stop violence by removing arms from people's hands is to succeed in removing ALL of the arms that can possibly hurt people. This is not possible.

    Guns will always be accessible by bad people.

    If you are unarmed, and an armed, trained person picks a fight with you, he will win that fight 100% of the time.

    Unless you protect yourself, or someone else is protecting you, you are a target for victimization.
  • S* 2012/12/24 06:29:36 (edited)
    Undecided
    S*
    +1
    It is not the weapon pulling the trigger, but we have to find a way to keep these weapons from the hands of crazies.

    In regards to the difference between hunting rifles and assault rifles, of course the basic principles apply, barrel, receiver and stock, but the way you reload seems to be an issue with the description. For a deer rifle, if you miss, the deer is likely gone, the need to reload forty rounds is not necessary. In assaulting a large number of people, some of whom might object, violently, high capacity and reloading quickly is a high priority. Anyone who does not understand that is either stupid or a liar.
  • phil.ol... S* 2013/01/04 23:08:28
    phil.olding.3
    Crazies can always get their hands on deadly weapons, if they're smart enough.

    Ever make a gun? It's not actually particularly difficult.

    Knowing that crazy people can always get guns, why aren't you armed? If you're unarmed, and someone who is armed and trained picks a fight with you, they will win that fight 100% of the time.

    The only way to stop someone with a gun from using it for bad things, is to have other good people with guns, ready to do bad things to bad people.

    Laws can only be enforced after they are broken. Police will probably only show up after your encounter with an armed person as taken place.
  • Mike J. Hirak 2012/12/24 04:38:22
    No
    Mike J. Hirak
    +4
    Virtually any rifle could be considered an "assault rifle"
  • phil.ol... Mike J.... 2013/01/04 23:15:31 (edited)
    phil.olding.3
    The real definition of "assault weapon" is "any weapon that can assault people"

    You're right. Completely.

    The only way to stop crime from happening, that involves removing guns, is to succeed in removing all of them, and THEN succeed in removing the means to import them into society or make them. This is impossible.

    Our money is protected by armed guards. Our children are protected by words on paper (laws), words on signs (gun free zones), and good intentions. The money is pretty safe.
  • TaxRetirementFund 2012/12/24 02:39:26 (edited)
    No
    TaxRetirementFund
    +1
    Neither should you. It doesn't matter what gun YOU think I do or do not need. I want to own and know how to use it properly. And YOU NOR anyone else has and never will have the right to tell me other wise. So screw YOU; THIS IS AMERICA GET USED TO IT OR LEAVE! And the day YOU or ANYONE else does feel they have the right. Try coming and taking it. END OF STORY!
  • roger 2012/12/24 01:38:36
    Undecided
    roger
    This system makes sense to me until we look at all aspects of it; the writer of this has the right idea:
    'before putting energy into a gun ban, let's be smart and ban gun images in all media - including video games.....and then ban psychiatric 'medicines' ...'
    http://www.halfpasthuman.com/...
  • phil.ol... roger 2013/01/04 23:06:14
    phil.olding.3
    Before removing one of our rights, we should remove some of our other rights?

    That is also unacceptable.
  • Centrist_Bill 2012/12/24 00:42:14
    No
    Centrist_Bill
    +2
    "Assault Rifles" are nothing more than civilian rifles with a different look. One item the OP And those that would ban them probably dont know is IF by chance you are going to go the Military Look rhetoric at one point in time the US used damned near every kind of weapon on the market. Are we going to ban them too?? The bottom line is the 2nd Amendment says, "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". WTF dont you people NOT understand about "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed".
  • Tiger Lily 2012/12/23 23:21:10
    Yes
    Tiger Lily
    +1
    having a gun for personal protection is a totally different issue than an assaul weapon for mass murder.

    Even the military base that was attacked was unable to stop the murders with numerous armed military personel on base when the attacker opened fire. To think that any civilian could do any better is absolute stupidity.
  • Goo gle Tiger Lily 2012/12/23 23:43:56 (edited)
    Goo gle
    +1
    There were restrictions in place that prevented any guns in the barracks at any military base thanks to President Clinton. This is why they were unable to stop him. The shooting took place in a gun free zone, sound familiar? The public does not have access to assault weapons. The ones you hear about in the media referred to as "assault weapons" are not as powerful as most hunting rifles and operate the same. The only difference is cosmetics. They look like assault rifles but operate differently. All I ask is if you have a stance on gun control, understand what you are talking about.
  • Amasaman Tiger Lily 2013/01/02 14:37:46
    Amasaman
    The mess hall was a "gun free zone." Do you really think he would have gone to the shooting range to commit a mass shooting?
  • phil.ol... Tiger Lily 2013/01/03 19:52:50
    phil.olding.3
    Having an assault weapon is for personal protection.

    You think our troops overseas should only carry 10 shot pump action or semi-automatic guns because they shouldn't be committing mass murder?

    Hell no! I carried machine guns in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I never murdered anyone with those!
  • Stryder 2012/12/23 23:02:29
    No
    Stryder
    +4
    No, I need one for shooting intruders. And, unless you've ever actually had one (an intruder), you wouldn't understand why.
  • Bali 2012/12/23 22:38:56
    No
    Bali
    +5
    well hell, i thought assault rifles were ALREADY banned. lets be real, the gubmint does not want an armed pouplace, but lest call it what it is. an assault riffle is an automatic wepon or a burst fire weapon. was the gun used by the school MURDERER one of these??? I say it was not. Tell me how long it takes to reload a semi-auto pistol? not long is the answer. if there is no one who is armed to shoot back at you, the you can take your time reloading. when will an ignorant america blame the shooter and not the weapon??? stupidity is rampant.
  • nrock74 "anti conservative ... 2012/12/23 19:48:44
    Yes
    nrock74 "anti conservative true american!!"
    +3
    Absolutely, anyone who attempts to make an excuse to have one outside of military use is doing for no other reason than they are completely brainwashed by the RWNJs and they will oppose ANY progressive action...It's that mentality that has contributed to more senseless murders than any other idealogogy by far.
  • Stryder nrock74... 2012/12/23 23:06:27 (edited)
    Stryder
    +3
    I'm not brainwashed by anybody. Let me ask you a question. Have you ever awakened at 3:30 am and walked out into your living room to find a guy bent over your tv set unhooking your vcr? I'll bet not. Well, I have. If I had been able to get to my .223 I would have blown his head off. As it was, the coward ran and dove out of my kitchen window (which he had pried open). So spare me your claptrap about brainwashing. Walk in the shoes of those who have been in harm's way and then talk to us. Until then, thank a soldier for your freedom and stfu.
  • Tiger Lily Stryder 2012/12/23 23:22:17
    Tiger Lily
    What make you think that you can do a better job than a military base with armed and trained people who were unable to stop the murder and assault there?
  • Stryder Tiger Lily 2012/12/23 23:27:30 (edited)
    Stryder
    +3
    Are you seriously asking that question? lol Well, for starters, I'm there WITH my weapon. The military doesn't normally carry weapons when just casually walking around a base such as Ft. Hood. That's why so many were killed. They were unarmed.
  • Goo gle nrock74... 2012/12/23 23:57:19
    Goo gle
    +2
    You do know the public does not have access to the same guns the military and police have right? I'm sure you don't know the difference or you wouldn't hold the position you do on this.
  • phil.ol... nrock74... 2013/01/03 19:54:03
    phil.olding.3
    Having guns that are for killing people does NOT contribute to senseless murders.

    All ARMS, as protected by THE BILL OF RIGHTS, are for killing people. All other uses besides killing people are secondary, illegitimate, and only exploit a loophole in the bill of rights. This is not my opinion - this is fact.
  • The River Rat 2012/12/23 19:43:32
    No
    The River Rat
    +6
    I want and need at least one of these for each member of my family.
  • Lydecho Rain (Лидия) 2012/12/23 19:40:01
    Undecided
    Lydecho Rain (Лидия)
    +1
    I don't think that guns should be given so freely as they are in the US and such countries, but I don't think that they should be completely banned. I think that people should be able to prove that they are not psychopathic killers, at the very least, in order to attain dangerous weapons.
  • dallasjoe 2012/12/23 19:29:47
    Yes
    dallasjoe
    +1
    Yeah you need Assualt Rifles in the Hunt I hear that the Deer are packing M-4s now
  • phil.ol... dallasjoe 2013/01/03 19:55:03
    phil.olding.3
    +1
    Hunting is not protected by the bill of rights. Hunting is done through exploiting a loophole in the bill of rights.

    ARMS are for KILLING PEOPLE. All other uses are secondary and illegitimate. This is not my opinion, this is FACT.
  • dallasjoe phil.ol... 2013/01/09 15:26:35
    dallasjoe
    +2
    Brother I agree
  • Bronar 2012/12/23 17:45:52
    Yes
    Bronar
    +4
    "Assault rifle" is poor phrase that leaves the debate undefined. I, a multiple gun owner, have no problem with that line moving towards less powerful guns in private hands. If you really think you and your buddies are going to defend yourself with an AK47 when the Government comes for you you are delusional.
  • Marshal Artz 2012/12/23 14:48:29
    Yes
    Marshal Artz
    +2
    These guns are made to kill people, as far as I know you can't use them to hunt with, because most State game agencies consider them an unfair advantage, compared to conventional guns. As for firing one on a gun range, I can see that I would most likely enjoy doing that. Why not allow the owners of the shooting range to rent these guns for recreational purposes only, and at that range only, plus buy that particular ammo. from gun ranges only. Any left over ammo. would have to be returned to the range. I understand there are people that like to blow things up. So lets do those type of activities on the firing range.
  • dallasjoe Marshal... 2012/12/23 19:32:19
    dallasjoe
    you can buy 5.56 Mm AKA .223 ball ammo anywhere The 7.62 MM ammo for an AK 47 a bit harder but not Impossible
  • Marshal... dallasjoe 2012/12/23 20:25:24
    Marshal Artz
    I guess the only solution, in that case, would be to design, a like gun for shooting ranges that takes a one of a kind cartridge. Same for the AK 47, if they were permitted on the firing range. That way, at least for the .223 you would be able to buy ammo. for you varmint type gun. That brings up another point, pass a law that would require cartridges that work in one type of gun only. A fast firing gun could be made to fire one particular size of ammo.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 79 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/15 02:06:01

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals