Average Americans don't need assault weapons

CNN ^ | Sun July 29, 2012 | By Roland Martin, CNN Contributor

[redreno]

CNN) -- To all of you gun lovers, feel free to go buy your Glock, shotgun, hunting rifle, .22 pistol, .357 Magnum or any of the other guns at your disposal.

But you do not need an AK-47.

For some, it's too soon to discuss gun reform, a little more than one week after the mass killings in Aurora, Colorado. I disagree. Too many Americans are being killed by guns every day; this most recent heinous tragedy should not keep us from having a rational debate.

[wastedyears]

Liberalism is a mental disease.

[wastedyears]

Dear Government,

Why do I need an assault weapon? Because, I do not trust you.

Sincerely, Citizen

You bitter clinger, you.

Sarcasm: off

[politicianslie]

I go to bed every night thinking that this country is probably the safest on earth because nobody is stupid enough to invade us.

They don't need to invade us. All they needed to do was get a reality style TV show host elected POTUS.

Obama will continue to disassemble the country $1 Trillion each step, destroy our ability to field a military, continue to send our wealth overseas as we buy oil, enable queers to molest our children, enable racial minorities to take our wealth.....

Are you at least starting to understand who the enemy is?

[Rome2000]

Not from long range you won't.

You can take out a target from 600 yards easy with an AK, even a Chinese Norinco.

Especially if you have a milled receiver, then 900-yards with decent ammo is possible.

[muir_redwoods]

"You can take out a target from 600 yards easy with an AK, even a Chinese Norinco."

Possible, neither easy nor even probable.

[Bernard Marx]

This writers ignorance shouldn’t be as stunning as it is.

I'm convinced media people like Roland attend an employer- required course at the Brady Institute for Indoctrination in Firearm Ignorance and Disinformation.

The difference between semi-automatic civilian models of so-called "assault weapons" and their fully-automatic military versions should be obvious to everyone by now. But liberals from Dianne Feinstein to our "guardians" in the media have worked overtime to confuse the issue. Even conservatives on this site often accept the wildly incorect name "assault rifle" for de-fanged AR-15s and AK's. They are ugly guns, NOT assault rifles.

[SaxxonWoods]

So that’s the way it’s going to be now? I can only buy what someone decides I “need”?

Screw that.

[count-your-change]

You’ll never take my Daisey Assault BB Gun away from me!

[philman_36]

But you do not need an AK-47.
All those words and I don't see him explaining why nobody needs an AK-47.

Do you see it, redreno?

[publius911]

We don’t need CNN.

And, judging by their viewership, most Americans agree with you.

Even a retard like Martin ought to be able to see that. Unless he's a brain-addled poofter...

[Billthedrill]

I'm honestly not sure where AK-47s came into this argument, actually, unless in the author's perfervid imagination someone has done something awful with one somewhere. Which is likely but entirely irrelevant.

Roland, buddy, it isn't about what you decide I "need". It's whether I decide I want one, for reasons that ought to scare the hell out of you and probably would if you had the wit to consider them. As it happens I prefer my military weaponry a bit more refined, along the order of an M1A or even a deadly, evil, semiautomatic AR. And I will have one, Roland, and I don't give a ripe rodent's rump whether you think I "need" it. Because as it happens, I just might "need" it, and God help you and everyone like you if I ever do.

[tallyhoe]

Ok I won’t buy an AK-47. I’ll buy this Remington 30 06 semi automatic rifle with scope!

[QT3.14]

They know fighting the second amendment is a loser, so they say it is OK to have guns, just not “assault weapons”.

Partially true. In recent times it is couched in terms of they aren't needed for hunting as if the word is one of rights.

Speaking of hunting, in England that was one of the pretexts to limit the bearing of arms by the little people over 200 years ago:

1803 - St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries 1:App. 300

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty. . . . The right of
self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the
study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible.
Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep
and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited,
liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In
England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious
pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed
aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for
very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to
counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to
protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have
been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other
engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or
other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred
can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

[1madmarine]

Let me see if I have this right. You said, “But you do not need an AK-47”. hmmm..I’d have to say I agree with you on that ...YOU do not need an AK-47 and YOU DO NOT NEED to say anything about what anyone needs

[Cobra64]

[Cobra64]

[Cobra64]

.

[Smokin' Joe]

But what is average? The average human has one testicle, one ovary, and one breast capable of lactation at some point in their life.

I'm not average, at least not that way, and I'd wager few gun owners are.

Ergo, I reckon I need one.

[Smokin' Joe]

We give up the black scary guns and they give up abortion.

And as soon as the deal is done, we paint them other colors!

My granddaughter wants one of the 'pink scary guns'...(sigh--I'll get her 'into' real camo yet....)

[Norm Lenhart]

Do you DENY the HORROR that is the Hello Kitty AR15?

Imagine you are a criminal that gets blown literally to hell by the Hello Kitty AR15. You are sitting there with all your fellow damned talking about how you got there.

You? “Raped and killed dozens...”

You? “BBQd puppies...”

You? “Voted for Obama...”

Hey new guy...how about you? How’d you get here?

...
...

“I...er...ah...got shot by a pink rifle with a cat on it....”

That’s hell ;)