[carton253]

Well... that is not really an answer.

I'm not saying that one shouldn't own an assault weapon... I'm asking why anyone would need one.

[KantianBurke]

hmm...those Korean store owners during the 92 LA riots seemed to think those things came in handy in warding off the obliteration of their stores.

[mr.pink]

Well... that is not really an answer.

I know. The point I was trying to make is that there countless things most folks do not "need", but are yet free to own.

I used the car analogy as a comparative of "excess". One cannot own an assualt weapon because of the speed of discharging rounds, yet one can own a car that can go 220 MPH even though one's restricted to driving no faster than 65 MPH.

I don't own an assualt weapon, but would not mind having one. There are nasty scenarios now in play (post 9-11) where an assualt rifle might be a pretty good thing to have.

[weaponeer]

I'm not saying that one shouldn't own an assault weapon... I'm asking why anyone would need one.

For the same reason some folks need Ferraris, Corvettes, golf clubs, speedboats, scuba outfits, surfboards, race cars, or any other non-work related, non-income producing, non-safety related , non-essential item.

Fun and recreation.

[Bernard Marx]

I'm not saying that one shouldn't own an assault weapon... I'm asking why anyone would need one.

Would you please define what you mean by "assault weapon?" Do you mean an "ugly semi-automatic gun" or a fully automatic rifle?

[My2Cents]

I agree. As another poster on FR once said (in mocking the pro-assault weapons argument), "They can take away my Abrams tank when they pry my charred dead body from the turret."