The Second Ammendment Lobby and Police Safety

[Dayuhan]

This (cited in original post):

I need an assault rifle in the event that I might have to declare my independence from a tyrannical government... whether you are Democrat or Republican, you can easily find countless instances of the government stepping all over your rights, whether it be on social issues (marriage, gay rights, religious rights, etc.) or fiscal issues (taxation, property rights, business regulations, etc.)

sounds less like a manifestation of the right to revolution than a proclamation of a right to shoot someone if the government pisses you off. One wonders how exactly the author intends to declare his independence, and whom he intends to shoot, over any of the issues mentioned.

I have no desire at all to see the right to see the right to keep and bear arms excessively constrained, but at the same time rights come with responsibilities, and if enough of this sort of talk goes around for long enough, sooner or later somebody's going to act on it and somebody is going to get shot.

It is interesting, and to me a little disconcerting, to see how the gun rights discourse has changed over the last few decades.

[TheCurmudgeon]

This (cited in original post):



sounds less like a manifestation of the right to revolution than a proclamation of a right to shoot someone if the government pisses you off. One wonders how exactly the author intends to declare his independence, and whom he intends to shoot, over any of the issues mentioned.

I have no desire at all to see the right to see the right to keep and bear arms excessively constrained, but at the same time rights come with responsibilities, and if enough of this sort of talk goes around for long enough, sooner or later somebody's going to act on it and somebody is going to get shot.

It is interesting, and to me a little disconcerting, to see how the gun rights discourse has changed over the last few decades.

Maybe because this has been a slow burn I never noticed it. And there were always the fringe out there who hated the government. The guy who refused to pay income tax because he felt the founding fathers were against it, or the group that went off into the woods and declared themselves an independent nation, but it did not seem to have this same general appeal.

[carl]

Since the motivation for buying an AR or an AK seems to be an issue here, I would like to comment on the reason most people who I know who bought one of these weapons did so. First, a lot of people over the years have had an interest in those weapons but never felt the urge to buy one UNTIL the government started to talk about imposing restrictions on them. Then those people figured if they had any interest in having one they had better get it quick and the guns started flying off the shelves. This first started in the 1990s and has happened periodically since. In other words, not nearly so many weapons would have been sold if the gov had kept it's mouth shut.

Second, the guns are easy to shoot well and they are fun to shoot. That is a huge reason they are so popular, they're fun.

Third, the ammunition isn't that expensive. More expensive than .22 but not so nearly so bad as most center fire calibers.

Fourth, ARs are extremely versatile weapons. You can set them up to do anything from prairie dog hunting to long range target shooting to home defense.

Fifth, regardless of what the big city progressive types think, ARs and AKs give a person much more confidence that they can effectively defend themselves than Mr. Biden's double barrel. And they also give any potential criminal that much more pause.

Finally, throughout our history civilians have had free access to the same kind of rifle that the military has had, and in fact during times of technical transition they have had access to much better weapons than the military was equipped with. There is nothing unique here.

[Stan]

Since the motivation for buying an AR or an AK seems to be an issue here, I would like to comment on the reason most people who I know who bought one of these weapons did so. First, a lot of people over the years have had an interest in those weapons but never felt the urge to buy one UNTIL the government started to talk about imposing restrictions on them. Then those people figured if they had any interest in having one they had better get it quick and the guns started flying off the shelves. This first started in the 1990s and has happened periodically since. In other words, not nearly so many weapons would have been sold if the gov had kept it's mouth shut.

Second, the guns are easy to shoot well and they are fun to shoot. That is a huge reason they are so popular, they're fun.

Third, the ammunition isn't that expensive. More expensive than .22 but not so nearly so bad as most center fire calibers.

Fourth, ARs are extremely versatile weapons. You can set them up to do anything from prairie dog hunting to long range target shooting to home defense.

Fifth, regardless of what the big city progressive types think, ARs and AKs give a person much more confidence that they can effectively defend themselves than Mr. Biden's double barrel. And they also give any potential criminal that much more pause.

Finally, throughout our history civilians have had free access to the same kind of rifle that the military has had, and in fact during times of technical transition they have had access to much better weapons than the military was equipped with. There is nothing unique here.

Carl,
While I tend to agree with you, I have some reservations herein...

Having hunted my entire life and 23 years in the Army, I personally have no need for an AR15 nor a Kalashnikov. I think both are mass produced inaccurate firearms. If I go bird hunting I take my O/U 16 gauge, if I go deer hunting I take my 30.06 with just three rounds, and if I go skeet shooting, I take my 12 gauge and 25 rounds of 9 shot. Details, details. But the point is, any seasoned hunter or shooter could perform the same amount of damage with an 8-round .45 pistol than someone with an AR or AK. They became exotic due to hype from the anti gun types in our government. How ironic

However, I do agree that most feel that their rights are being infringed upon and some feel the immediate need to scarf up on a firearm that may end up on the endangered species list soon.

Stan,
Condor has a point and your posted link to Wiki says it all.

The definition of Weapon vs Rifle and how those definitions ended up so stifling in the public eye. The govt. provided the hype, the gun manufacturers provided the thrill, and the public went shopping.

If they ban my Colt Commander tomorrow because it has now been determined that an 8-round magazine semi-automatic pistol in the hands of a sharp shooter can kill LEO and harm to others, the general public will scarf those firearms up too.

The current limitations and bans on specific firearms (due to some fruitcake that blew a brain fuse in a shopping mall or on Ft. Hood) are too politically charged without sufficient justification. It's also illegal to possess a hand grenade. Wait til that day comes when the possessor employs it in a shopping mall !