Posted on 12/22/2012 11:32:10 AM PST by rellimpank
In the wake of the deadly Connecticut school shooting last week, one question has repeatedly surfaced in the Black Hills and across much of the country: Why would anyone want to own an assault weapon?
One thing is clear — the high-powered rifles capable of shooting multiple rounds in a hurry are in high demand. After President Barack Obama said this week he would push to renew a ban on purchasing the rifles, local gun-shop owners said the weapons have been flying off their shelves.
Meanwhile, gun owners in Rapid City cite diverse reasons for purchasing the weapons. Some say they are durable and accurate; a few see them as a financial investment or a way to exercise their constitutional rights; while others point to their value in self-protection or in the fun of target shooting.
Whatever the reason, assault-rifle owners are committed to the weapon.
"There is something kind of zen-like in setting up a bench and trying to put
(Excerpt) Read more at rapidcityjournal.com ...
I think he meant that no one is going to be shooting back at you if it’s a gun free zone, so having to reload is not going to change the outcome very much, if at all.
While I can understand that (I was almost there), I decided that we'd probably be fighting people who used that ammo, and it might be neat send their own (captured ammo) back their way if that happened.
Sadly the communists we are fighting were already here.
Gun Grabber: “Why do you need an assault weapon?”
Me: “To protect people like me from people like you.”
They need to start thinking about places to hide their rifles.
My Ruger 10/22 currently looks exactly like this, so I don't think they would approve of it it's appearance.
True, certainly.
However I am not particularly exercise by the use of the word, as the reality is that these rifles are functionally identical to genuine military rifles in the circumstances in question.
They ARE deadlier than the usual civilian hunting rifles in the context of a massacre like this, in terms of potential dead people per minute, and they are no less deadly in this context than an M4 carbine. They might as well be called “assault rifles” because they might as well be assault rifles.
The argument is a complaint about rhetoric. Though it is to a degree an exaggeration, it isn’t much of one. This has to be conceded, at least within a reasonable discussion.
The real argument as I see it is whether the political purpose of the Second Amendment trumps danger of the rare cases when weapons that conform so well to such a constitutional purpose are misused.
However, the media's more concerned that I may sink one using a single armor-piercing .223 round.
Yes it would make a difference.
A small magazine would reduce the rate of fire, so, depending on the circumstances (the victims aren’t trapped, etc.) it would give people more opportunity to flee or attack the shooter.
Mine is for “ensuring the security of a free state” just like the Second Amendment states. That being said, my wife, my daughter, my son-in-law, my grandson and me all enjoy putting a 30 round magazine through that puppy.
How long did Lanza's shooting spree last?
We don’t seem to have the whole story yet, but I believe it was under 20 minutes.
He seems to have fired at least 100 rounds, and I think it may have been more.
What the rate of fire was in any given period was, or what opportunity the victims had to escape, etc. are still unknown.
Figure 10 seconds for a mag change.
30rd mags = 3 mag changes = 30 seconds
10rd mags = 11 mag changes = 110 seconds
Difference = 80 seconds.
Doesn't seem like it should make much difference in the course of a 20 minute shooting spree.
I honestly never understood the fascination with AR’s until I got one. It is an all around great go to gun, extremely accurate, can be modified in a million ways, and is fun to shoot.
Repeat after me: No weapons ban whatsoever!
This is not necessarily true.
In any practical sense any semi-auto rifle is potentially as deadly as a AR15. The only functional difference is the capacity of the magazine.
Take for instance the Rugar Mini-14. The standard 5 round magazine would require 4 extra magazines to equal the 20 round standard magazine for a AR-15 (my AR-15 did come with a 5 round magazine from Colt).
But the Mini-14 does have 20 and 30 round after market magazines that are available which can give it equal fire power to the AR-15.
In all reality any semi-auto hunting rifle with a detachable box magazine has the same potential as an AR-15. It only needs for some sheet metal worker to come up with an after market high capacity magazine.
Only the esthetics and ease of modification make a hunting rifle different from the AR-15.
I’ve heard several reports - and seen a timeline - setting the time from Lanza’s entry to suicide as ten minutes.
We don't "need" to own an "assault rifle" (whatever they heck THAT is ...). But NEED is not the only motive for owning one. Nor is it a prerequisite to be vouchsafed the RIGHT to own one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
