And why should the public have access to these again?

[R13]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Milk3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Monkeyhead</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Once again if the Gov't decided to take over the country would you want to own a AK-47 or my little girls pink single shot .22 cricket? </div></div>
He's knows Obama is going to do this and he's so far up Obamas arse he don't want the smart ones like us to be able to fight it </div></div>

That might be the most idiotic thing you have ever posted. Keep it up.

[Monkeyhead]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Monkeyhead</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Once again if the Gov't decided to take over the country would you want to own a AK-47 or my little girls pink single shot .22 cricket? </div></div>

If you were sitting in a library and a guy come in and unloaded, would you rather him have a AK-47 or pink single shot .22 cricket?
IMO my scenario is more likely to happen with an assault weapon. </div></div>

Why did you not answer the question? As for your question it does not matter someone will more than likely die. I would rather them have an AK-47 than a pink shotgun, so should they be taken out our hands also?

It does not matter what your opinion may be, you can not predict which scenario will happen first. Hopefully neither one does, but there is always the risk of them happening.

[R13]

I am not to afraid of the govt. rushing in trying to kill me nowheres near as much as I am when I go to college and being afraid of someone pulling one of these types of guns, or any type really and opening fire. Though they could use any gun, these in particular could kill many more and do a lot more damage.

[Monkeyhead]

I do not fear either one as of now. Could it change in the next 5 to 10 years, maybe 10 to 20, who knows? I have to think about the future of my family. Do I want to let the Govt. take something away from me now only to have it haunt me in the future

[R13]

I understand where you are coming from, but right now I am in college and thats the main problem I am worried about with these weapons. Both scenarios are scary to think about, but to me right now, the one I am talking about is a whole lot more realistic.

[imported_GC1]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlueWahooChambor</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlueWahooChambor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the "alot of lives at risk" part

thats the dumbest thing ive ever heard

would you say that more lives are at risk from people drinking and driving than they are from people who choose to own a gun?

lets ban drinking.......hell while were at it......lets just ban cars because of the number of accident related deaths every year

what else do you want to ban? </div></div>

That argument was compared to pot, which should be legalized. But cars are needed and alcohol is needed lol...I'd like for you to tell me how an uzi is needed? </div></div>
alcohol is needed?

really?

but again........you said it put lives at risk by people owning a gun

im still waiting for you to tell me how

how is somebody who legally purchases a firearm putting lives at risk?

regardless of the type of weapon.......a law abiding citizen who legally owns it

how is them owning a gun putting lives at risk? </div></div>

Didnt you catch the lol after it?

Hey genius, I havent been talking about any gun. The whole conversation has been about assault weapons, not a regular rifle. So again why shouldnt guns like uzi's and tec-9 not be banned? </div></div>

So how do you define an "assault weapon"? If I take a pellet rifle and shoot you with it that is an assault weapon isn't it? Hasn't an assault been committed?

[R13]

That'd be assault with a weapon, doesnt make it an "assault weapon". I am talking about guns that were listed under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994.

"Assault weapon refers to semi-automatic firearms (that is, firearms that, when fired, automatically extract the spent casing and load the next round into the chamber, ready to fire again) that were developed from earlier fully-automatic weapons. By former U.S. law the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, H&K G36E, TEC-9, all AK-47s, and Uzis)"

[1inStripes]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am not to afraid of the govt. rushing in trying to kill me nowheres near as much as I am when I go to college and being afraid of someone pulling one of these types of guns, or any type really and opening fire. Though they could use any gun, these in particular could kill many more and do a lot more damage. </div></div>

Like the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 really stopped anything from happening. ie Columbine 1999.

[Milk3]

I think it's funny when R13 calls other people stupid to try to hide his own stupidity when it's been talk about countless time by numerous people haha

[PVVikeFan]

I can't recall ever seeing a more ignorant person a loooong time.
People like him either learned very quickly or suffered very badly during my military days. A grenade in the drawers could be just what he needs. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]