firedoc5 Posted November 2, 2008 Posted November 2, 2008 As paranoia runs rampant, I can only trust the two of us, and I have my doubts about you! (Wish I knew who to attribute that to, or what I paraphrased from) I'm not paranoid. Everyone is out to get me. :glasses5:
reaper Posted November 2, 2008 Posted November 2, 2008 Yes you are right. High powered assault weapons are needed in every home; I mean who is going to protect us from the 12 year olds if we do not do it ourself?? FYI, I am not against gun ownership as I was raised around guns my entire life and have a healthy respect for them. Unfortunately, not everyone received the foundation of gun ownership that I did. Therefore, some weapons, such as these need to be banned (yes I said it) or very, heavily regulated. Had this ex-con only had a handgun, do you think this scenario would have varied any? Do you think he would have been able to get off 29 shots through a closed door with much accuracy? Do you think if he had to pull the trigger each time, he would have had time to think, possibly pause or even stop instead of spewing multiple rounds in a matter of seconds without much thought needed? Just asking... Majority of assault rifles in the hands of private citizens are semi auto's. Since there was no mention of a fully auto being used, then I have to assume that it was semi auto. Which means, he did have to pull the trigger 29 times and thought about each one! The only difference in owning an AK-47 vs a 30-06 is the amount of ammo it will hold. The question is why was a convicted felon in possession of any firearm? Why was his girlfriend caught running from the scene with $7500.00 in cash? I can see "drug dealer" all over this. The man has been charged with murder and two counts of assault with intent to kill. I think the police have seen right through his BS protection excuse. I do not believe in banning any guns. I believe in enforcing existent laws, that were made to keep them out of the wrong hands. If I am an honest law abiding citizen, why should I not be able to own any gun I want. I do have the right to bear arms, it does not state which arms I can have!!
Richard B the EMT Posted November 2, 2008 Posted November 2, 2008 Just because you are paranoid does not mean "They" are NOT out to get you!
firedoc5 Posted November 2, 2008 Posted November 2, 2008 So it's you that is out to get me. I knew there was just something about you. :violent3:
ncmedic309 Posted November 2, 2008 Posted November 2, 2008 The same outcome could have been just as easily achieved using a handgun of the right caliber and load. It didn't have to be an assault rifle shooting through the walls of the residence to make it outside and strike those victims. I didn't note any mention of the rifle being auto either...
jsadin Posted November 3, 2008 Posted November 3, 2008 The only difference in owning an AK-47 vs a 30-06 is the amount of ammo it will hold. Ballistically they are two different rounds with the 30-06 being the more powerful of the two. I'd rather be shot by the AK. Lessee 220grain bullet at 2800fps or 125grain bullet at 2300fps? Kinetic Energy = 1/2(Mass*velocity^2). You do the math. Anyone who claims so called "assault rifles" are more dangerous than other types of firearms isn't interested in being bothered with silly "facts".
Dustdevil Posted November 3, 2008 Posted November 3, 2008 I get a kick out of the redundancy of the term "high-powered assault rifle". That's like calling someone a Hispanic Mexican. Does anyone own a low-powered assault rifle? For that matter, does anyone own a low-powered rifle of any style? Is there even such a thing? Puhleeze. I've been to a lot of gun shows, and I've never seen one. It's just more indication of an irrational and emotional response to something, with no rational or factual basis. I can quickly put sixteen rounds through my door with any of my handguns, or even my 22 rifle. Do you know how many pieces of buckshot are in one 12-gauge slug? Multiply that times the 7 rounds in the shotgun, and you have just way outnumbered the capacity of any "assault rifle" magazine. And trust me, they do all go through the door and the wall, with no problem. Especially after that first round paves the way. We already had a complete assault weapon ban. You know why they dropped it with no debate or fanfare? Because there were ZERO statistics to even remotely suggest that it had any effect whatsoever on the violent crime rate. Like you said, AK, if something isn't working, isn't it time to try something new? All you are suggesting is the same old things that have been tried and failed for years. Where's this new plan?
akflightmedic Posted November 3, 2008 Author Posted November 3, 2008 So you routinely shoot through doors and walls with different types of weaponry to test this? Hmmm, and these are the people we keep allowing to own these. You big meanie door!
firedoc5 Posted November 3, 2008 Posted November 3, 2008 So you routinely shoot through doors and walls with different types of weaponry to test this? Hmmm, and these are the people we keep allowing to own these. You big meanie door! We did. Growing up on a farm we use to shoot up some of the old buildings for kicks & giggles. We liked it when we caused a lot of splintering on the other side. After a while my folks put a stop to it. Even though it was my dad who started it in the first place.
DwayneEMTP Posted November 3, 2008 Posted November 3, 2008 And what is more dangerous than even UNregulated distribution of assault rifles? No matter what studies are quoted, laws explained, positions defended, I will NOT change my views.... Closed minds. I would have bet good money I'd never hear such a comment come from you ol' man...tsk tsk. Dwayne
Recommended Posts