Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Here's a Crazy Idea...Use the "Breastaurant" concept to buy back Assault Rifles and High Cap Mags [View all]Straw Man
(6,613 posts)22. For someone raised in a military family ...
... you sure have a lot of misconceptions about firearms in general and ARs in particular.
Accuracy - there are more accurate rifles out there. Specifically, I have heard the .223 rounds have a tendency to tumble.
Only if you mismatch the bullet weight with the twist rate of the barrel, which is something target shooters figure out shortly after they learn to tie their shoes.
Hunting - I have been hunting, and I have never used or seen used an AR in that context. It's not sporting. I had a friend who was a big game hunter, and even when he got his Cape Buffalo (reportedly the most dangerous animal to kill. They charge, and you have to hit them in the kneecaps to bring them down) he used a bolt action rifle.
What did you hunt? For varmints and feral hogs, ARs are quite popular. The rate of fire and the cartridge size are quite appropriate for those applications.
What is it that makes an AR unsporting? You do know that game laws dictate smaller magazines, right? So the old canard about riddling the game with bullet-holes is patently false.
Big game hunters don't use ARs because they want a much larger and more powerful cartridge than the intermediate cartridges for which the AR is typically chambered. Furthermore, for dangerous game they need absolute mechanical reliability, which pretty much rules out any semi-auto. Here rate of fire takes a backseat to pure power and total dependability. The last thing you want when a rhino is charging is a jammed rifle.
Excellent Defense Weapon - If you are sitting in Afganistan fighting a war, I agree. Any gun brought into the home raises your risk of death by several orders of magnitude. There is way too much data on this to argue the point.
So you categorically deny the possibility of armed self-defense? That's another argument, but certainly isn't germane to the AR alone. And you're wrong, by the way, since that data grossly underreports defensive use of firearms.
Fun to Shoot - OK, the two most fun guns I have ever shot: One - a marine target shooting rifle. A heavy .22 caliber with adjustable sights. I could hit anything with that rifle. Two - a bolt action 30.06 with a scope. I could hit anything, it kicked like a mule and blasted big, gaping holes in the tree trunks we used for targets. Point is, you don't need an AR to have fun.
Ah, the objective definition of "fun." What suffices for you should suffice for anyone, right?
Competitive Target Shooting - There are more accurate rifles, and serious target shooters don't use mass produced, cheap ARs. Check out what they are shooting with at the Olympics sometime.
Oh, I'm sorry, were we talking about banning only "mass produced, cheap ARs"? I thought we were talking about banning all of them. In any case, many serious shooters do use ARs.
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2008/06/shooting-usa-covers-camp-perry-centennial-this-week/
https://www.google.com/search?q=camp+perry+national+match&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch
Olympic events use .22LR exclusively. None of the Olympic rifle events allow semi-autos. That's the way the IOC wants it, I guess.
Low Recoil - Once again, lots of other choices out there.
For low recoil in a centerfire rifle, it's hard to beat a .223 semi-auto. Shall we all just go to Mini-14s? Would that make us safer?
I think people buy ARs because they can. I know a lot of vets, and was raised in a military family. These men and women have been trained in the use of ARs, and are the most responsible gun owners I know. None of them own ARs. None. Every one of them keeps their GI weaponry where it belongs when they are stateside - locked up at the armory.
And I know lots of vets who own their own ARs and compete and train with them. ARs aren't "GI weaponry," in any case -- but you knew that. Soldiers aren't allowed to take their select-fire M4s home, no.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
59 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Here's a Crazy Idea...Use the "Breastaurant" concept to buy back Assault Rifles and High Cap Mags [View all]
CapnSteve
Mar 2013
OP
"...getting hard cash?" More like getting hard. Sounds like a PeTAful effort.
Eleanors38
Mar 2013
#2
Why not just have Bloomberg adopt everyone in the country and pay us all an allowance?
jmg257
Mar 2013
#31
Sounds about as sexist as the people who use women as sexual objects to sell guns.
AtheistCrusader
Mar 2013
#36