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

ragemage

(104 posts)
8. why does the average person need these weapons?
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:31 PM
Dec 2012

So tell me, why does the average hunter/collector need these weapons? If you cannot take down a deer/bear/elk within two to three shots you are not a very good hunter. Try bow hunting, much more enjoyable and challenging.

Seriously, why does the average citizen need a semi-automatic weapon with a high capacity magazine? What is the purpose of owning it? Once you buy it you know you want to try it out. So you go down to the range and shoot off 20, 30, 60, 90 rounds. And then what? Did it make you feel good? Empowered? Better self esteem? Could you not do that with a few 5 or 10 round mags?

I am an optimist but also a realist. I know we cannot get rid of all semi-auto weapons currently out there. But c'mon already, limit the large capacity mags. Stop selling them. Stop selling military looking weapons to average wannabe GI Joes and Janes. Make the rules much much harder to get a semi-auto weapon, rifle and handgun.

For you 2nd amendment types and overall gun lovers, please tell me do you really plan on stopping a home invasion with your gun? You better sleep with that piece locked and loaded at all times, 24/7. Otherwise it will not work. Having them in a safe is going to do you no good. Will the thief wait for you to unlock your safe and retrieve your firearm? That is the part that truly baffles me. Are there that many paranoid, scared people that they think they need a weapon with them at all times? Protection you will say...home/family/country...Protection from what? What are you so afraid of? Rhetorical I know...

High capacity magazines should be illegal. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #1
Simple-I agree digonswine Dec 2012 #2
OK what about my replica 1858 New Army Remington revolver? Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #3
Collector items could be separately regulated. Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #5
Live rounds are John2 Dec 2012 #10
He didn't purchase any ammo or firearms, they were not his property pediatricmedic Dec 2012 #30
Let's take this slowly and simply intaglio Dec 2012 #33
Exactly alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #60
How about we have the NRA to add an amendment exempting guns older than 100 years? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #21
I don't own any originals. Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #34
No exemption would be my vote. fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #39
Why? Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #43
Not Historical or Worthy of Grandfathering fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #44
But if there is no functional difference, what is gained? Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #45
One is ACTUALLY Historical fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #46
I don't own them for thier historical attributes. Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #50
Exactly fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #52
OK, so what about single-shot muzzle loading rifles? Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #53
Is that related to the start of the thread? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #56
I'm just watching my collection vanish. Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #57
Your ideas... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #54
The Intellectual Discourse is So Overwhelming fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #55
Think of it... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #58
OK fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #59
Deal discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2012 #61
if ya go with 10 rounds max in clip or mag kooljerk666 Dec 2012 #76
Seriously, John2 Dec 2012 #9
200 rounds is 10 boxes of 20 rounds each. ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #25
Yes. eom uppityperson Dec 2012 #23
Absolutely. You can defend your home or hunt with a five-round magazine. Flatulo Dec 2012 #28
No.... and no. n/t PavePusher Dec 2012 #65
If we don't give on something meaningful, we're going to lose them all. There's a sea change comin' Flatulo Dec 2012 #72
If we give up something, what's the quid pro quo? What do we get in return? n/t PavePusher Dec 2012 #79
If what gun owners give up is in fact meaningful (the Clinton AWB was not) and effective, Flatulo Dec 2012 #82
No, the penalty for possession should be 20 years. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #31
perfect! They can share a cell with the guy busted for selling a little cocaine! snooper2 Dec 2012 #37
+1 I have no problem with this treestar Dec 2012 #68
Why 5? Maybe just single shot for civillian sporting arms Blandocyte Dec 2012 #80
Yes, he was a Cha Dec 2012 #4
It would be awfully nice if people like that Crunchy Frog Dec 2012 #7
The hatred and maillficence that stood behind that gun friday and... sheshe2 Dec 2012 #6
why does the average person need these weapons? ragemage Dec 2012 #8
Understand, the second amendment is not about hunting. Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #11
The days of our country relying on a citizens' militia went the way of the buggy whip. SunSeeker Dec 2012 #13
With our standing army, what purpose does the well regulated militia serve? You know the part the RC Dec 2012 #15
Ask the National Guard krispos42 Dec 2012 #26
Nonsense fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #47
Yeah, there are differences krispos42 Dec 2012 #74
Any others? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #75
Some designs let you add on more stuff. krispos42 Dec 2012 #78
All hunting rifle designs can be traced directly to previous military-issue rifles. PavePusher Dec 2012 #66
Did the founders actually not want a professional army? primavera Dec 2012 #35
As I understand it, they thought a standing army was dangerous. SunSeeker Dec 2012 #41
You make an excellent point. A Simple Game Dec 2012 #14
We already do. It's called the Army reserve. And Navy Reserve. And Coast Guard Reserve.... SunSeeker Dec 2012 #17
And if you are going to fight a 40 ton tank a 5 shot clip just won't do. A Simple Game Dec 2012 #19
Lmao! primavera Dec 2012 #36
Why would anyone attack a tank with a rifle? PavePusher Dec 2012 #67
Are you repeating an NRA-zombie talking point? Do you have recent USSC opinions to ProgressiveEconomist Dec 2012 #16
**** NCarolinawoman Dec 2012 #12
Change the second amendment, it is broken and a relic from another era. Throckmorton Dec 2012 #18
They are penis extensions or artificial spines for cowards. kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #32
That's somewhat of an insulting misunderstanding of gun ownership. Flatulo Dec 2012 #42
I don't own a penis. And I won't see your gun until your teenager's friend kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #49
Then you would assume wrongly. My guns Flatulo Dec 2012 #62
Good for you. Why are you and others like you not working from within the gun kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #64
Well now we're talking. I dropped my NRA membership back in the day of the Clinton AWB Flatulo Dec 2012 #71
A common misperception: PavePusher Dec 2012 #81
Projection, eh? PavePusher Dec 2012 #69
There is a small pistol safe called Gun Vault that uses a tactile locking system. Flatulo Dec 2012 #63
When will these senseless acts of violence end? iandhr Dec 2012 #20
Never. Our species has been violent since the beginning it seems. nt Mojorabbit Dec 2012 #24
I have more hope than that primavera Dec 2012 #38
What had shocked me the most was... CBHagman Dec 2012 #22
Of course he did krispos42 Dec 2012 #27
So fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #51
Give me a link and I'll be happy to discuss it with you tomorrow. krispos42 Dec 2012 #73
I find the name of the gun he used Bushmaster interesting lovuian Dec 2012 #29
I don't think the magazine side made a difference here NickB79 Dec 2012 #40
3 seconds or less. n/t PavePusher Dec 2012 #70
ACT NOW MR. PRESIDENT fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2012 #48
my continuity of thought MrYikes Dec 2012 #77
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Police: Shooter carried ‘...»Reply #8