Submit a question to our community and get an answer from real people.
Submit

Should Obama ban military style assault rifles?

I want to get a general idea of how many pro-gun/ anti-gun people are out here on ask.com

Report as

no its our right to bear arms, im not a felon,so i can do or own what i want,if i can pay for it

Helpful (6) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (13)
Report as
@Baya: I assume you are referring to your 2nd Amendment right. If so, to what "well regulated militia" do you belong?
Report as
Good job caltex
Report as
The NRA prides itself on protecting the 2nd Amendment, yet they fight all regulations despite the fact that regulation is an integral part of that amendment. I respect people's right to legal access to regulated firearms, but I have no respect for the NRA.
Report as
@Bigred: I assure you I will not lose a moment of sleep over the fact that the NRA doesn't give a &$;@ about me. My comment, however, still stands. They simply ignore the part of the 2nd Amendment about a "well regulated militia".
Report as
@caltec what part of "shall not be infringe" do u not understand?
Report as
As written, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is in the context of "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state". Otherwise, if the "not be infringed" phrase is to stand as an independent statement, then one must also accept that "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" is an independent statement. But it isn't even a sentence. It is modifier to what follows. In other words, members of a well regulated militia shall not be prohibited from owning and using firearms. But regardless of splitting hairs over the syntax and what our Founding Fathers intended, regulation of firearms does not prohibit anyone from owning and using firearms as long as they meet the necessary requirements. That is unless you are saying any escapee from the funny farm should be able to run into a gun shop and buy an RPG.
Report as
U can sure right a lot..and yet u have not proved any point what so ever. A lunatic cannot go go to the gun store and buy an rpg or a gun at all.
Report as
@Bernie: Thank you for reading and understanding what I am saying. Gun regulation disallows gun ownership by those determined to be unstable, but does allow others to own guns. So we both agree that gun control is good. We just disagree on the degree of regulation. I assume (hope) you agree that gun control is also good in that it greatly reduces the chances that our neighbors will have RPGs laying around the house.
Report as
Reply to what I commented on your answer.
Report as
i belong to the michigan militia, dont matter to me anyway,they cant take what i already own, when they made the bill,the militias were vigilanties,not law enforcement! go ahead and be a sitting duck,i wont be
Report as
@Baya: So you are a supporter of vigilante justice? That doesn't seem to jive with what I know of the Constitution and the intent of the Founding Fathers. But I have no doubt you will prove me wrong.
Report as
your an idiot
Report as
@Baya: Thank you for that very persuasive argument in defense of your support for vigilante justice. There is no way I could possibly compete with your brilliant intellect. I concede.
Report as
Add a comment...
icic6772

No. Absolutely not!!!

Helpful (5) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
I agree!
Report as
Add a comment...

Yes. What are going to be used for? Can't use them or hunting to powerful. FYI I'm a hunter myself.

Helpful (3) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (23)
Report as
icic6772
There are some pretty big animals to hunt you know. And it could be for home defense. Nothing says get the f*ck out of my house like an assault rifle in you're face.
Report as
Well ya I get where u are coming from but any gun in the face of a robber will make them get out. Where I live the only big game we have are whitetail but in my defense I don't need a high power assault gun in my home. To me their just dust collectors. And it makes me sick just looking at them due to all the shootings.
Report as
It's just the beginning. If you give up ONE right, they'll come right back wanting to take more and more of your rights. And they will continue until you have lost them all. It happened in Germany, Poland, China and Great Britten. We CAN'T let it happen here.
Report as
Like I said I get where u guys are coming from but I have no need for them. But if he takes away all firearms ill be mad. Can't change tradition. It's hard to change something that happened to long ago when we weren't even alive and I'm talking bout the singing of the declaration.
Report as
Herb is so unintentionally funny. You mean Britain where they had 12 gun murders in a year instead of the 10,000 we had here? Yeah, we certainly can't let THAT happen.
Report as
icic6772
I'm pretty sure it's more than twelve. And guns have been in America since the beginning. You can't say that about many other countries. And you can't take away something that has been in America for over 300 years.
Report as
I agree with Herbsmith
Report as
Icic, I believe slavery was legal in the colonies/US longer than semiautomatics, which is all anyone wants to ban.
Report as
Doesn't matter whether you would use certain guns or not. We have the Constitutional right to own any gun we please.
Report as
The 2nd amendment isn't not about hunting...It's about the people having the power to over throw an unjust and Tyrannical government.
Report as
That I know it's not about hunting I took a government class you know? And I said it before I have no need for an assault rifle. But on the other hand I use a rifle to shoot my deer and he takes away our right to bear arms all together then you'll see me go mad.
Report as
U have have me no real answer
Report as
Im as you can say on the fence about it or you don't get what I'm saying?
Report as
Some years it has been closer to 12 but here's the first count I found. That's 39 in GB *AND* Wales (Two countries) and almost 10K here. So my number were basically close.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/bcam/facts/godblessamerica2010sm.jpg

And the 2nd amendment is not about tyranny. I've explained that more than once here before. It's also foolish to think guns are any match for the major weaponry of those "tyrants" in the govt anyway. Also it's a myth about guns having defeated "tyranny".

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/17/guns_have_never_saved_us/

If you read the 2nd amendment with even a moderately open mind it's very clear it doesn't sanction ownership of guns. It does say you can be in teh National Guard though, all you pretend-patriots.

Report as
No I understand.
Report as
@tralbry ur an idiot
Report as
wickedpissah
bigred- no, you do not have a Constitutional right to own any gun you please.
Try to buy an M-60 machine gun. Try to buy a Browning M2E2. Try to buy a D-20 Howitzer.
Those are all guns that you are not allowed to own.
If you want play with the big toys - enlist in the military.
Report as
^^^ agreed went I a gun shop right after that shooting in Conn. happened and they're careless with their guns. They lacked in muzzle control and left hang guns lay on the counter with ammo just five steps away on a shelf oh an no tigger locks.
Report as
icic6772
Well that's the stores fault.
Report as
Bernie, were you he captain of the debate team?
Report as
wickedpissah
Well... he was the captain of da 'bate team.
Get it?
Report as
@wick you'll b bate to Psychos with guns
Report as
Umm I use AR15s for coyote hunting, it is a great mid sized game rifle... And I think shooting squirrels with a pellet gun doesn't count as hunting... Because if you were a hunter you would know that a deer rifle is a lot more powerful than any firearm the Obama calls an "assault weapon"
Report as
Add a comment...
wickedpissah

Congress first has to submit and pass a Bill in both Houses, then it goes to the President to sign into law.
If Congress passes such a Bill, the President will (and should) sign it.
Why does a civilian need a semi-automatic assault rifle with 100-round magazines?
If you want to play with the big guns- JOIN THE MILITARY!

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (11)
Report as
icic6772
100 round drums are stupid. We don't need those. But we still should be able to own assault rifles. And they're not talking about semi auto rifles. They're talking about full auto.
Report as
If you give up ONE right, they'll eventually take them all!
Report as
wickedpissah
Herb- the "slippery slope" is an invalid logical fallacy.
Report as
Stars wicked!
Report as
Star wicked
Report as
Nobody in their right mind would even use a hundred round clip. They would jam after a few shots that btw must be fired one at a time. You all think they are machine guns or something. Assault rifle is a made up name by the media and legislators who want to take away our constitutional rights starting with the one that guarantees all the rest of our rights.
Report as
Talk to those in other countries that have banned guns. See how they enjoy serfdom or even the genocides that eventually happen. You really shouldn't trust a government to protect you. Only you can.
Report as
To have the ability to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. "The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson
Report as
You forget this ban has been in place before... I still have my guns, what about you?
Report as
Yes and it did nothing at all. There was still many mass shootings even some worse than today's.
Report as
wickedpissah
bigred- the Sandy Hook shooter used a 100-round magazine. Genocides? When was the last genocide in Great Britain?
You wanna-be tough guys think your little handgun is gonna protect you if you try to stand toe-to-toe with the United States military? The most powerful force ever assembled in the history of this planet! Seriously?
LOL.
Good luck with that.
Report as
Add a comment...

No

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
thatoneguy97

I think we have a right to have guns, to protect ourselves, and our families

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (5)
Report as
Your answer is a non-sequeter since it does not answer the question "Should military-style assault rifles be banned?" The question is not asking if ALL firearms should be banned. No one I know wants to take all firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens for the exact reasons stated in your answer.

We all agree that we do not want our neighbors to have unrestricted access to nuclear weapons. So, the only question is where that restriction should end. I say those restrictions should include military-style assault weapons, but not regulated hunting rifles and hand guns which do not employ high-capacity magazines. Would you now care to answer the actual question?
Report as
thatoneguy97
Dude, wtf I'm 15 i was answering the question, and stating my opinion, geez
Report as
But that's my point. You didn't answer the question. You answered a question that wasn't asked.
Report as
thatoneguy97
Great, don't care anymore. Get over it
Report as
Great. I'm over it. Have a nice day!
Report as
Add a comment...

I sure think so that we need to have more strict rules over a registry of a gun ; but it wouldnt change any crimes that has been going on for the past years . People will continue to disobey ...

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
@Russian: We have a well-regulated policy regarding automobiles. As high as automobile fatalities are, I have no doubt they would be much higher without those regulations. Imagine anyone going out and buying a care and driving it as fast as they want, on any side of the road they want, plowing through intersections without rules of the road to decide who goes when. And we don't allow people to drive legally without adequate insurance so compensation can be provided in the case damage is done. Without that insurance, people risk having their car impounded and being slapped with a fine or jail time. Why not have a similar system for guns?
Report as
Gun registries would eventually be misused some how...
Report as
Add a comment...

Yes. When you're protecting yourself, you're protecting yourself from harm, right? What's the main cause of homocide? Guns. Especially assault weapons. But that's just my opinion.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (3)
Report as
icic6772
Yeah cuz must muggings and home invasions are used with M4s
Report as
Only 8% of gun related killings in this country were related to "assault weapons". The only people that are affected by gun laws are people who obey the law. And people who obey the law don't kill except when defending themselves against people who don't obey the law. So what real purpose do more gun laws serve?
They make the good guys easier targets.
Report as
The main cause of homocide is gang activity and more people are beaten to death then shot with rifles...
Report as
Add a comment...

He can't without Congressional approval, and we all know productive Congress is at present.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...

Obama can't ban them but congress can and should. No normal person needs an assault rifle or 100 rounds at a time. I come from a long line of military and none of my family has ever felt the need to own such guns, they had more than enough of that while serving.
As for the whole "criminals don't obey laws" argument, it is specious. If you follow that to its logical conclusion, we should have no laws because criminals won't obey them.
By the way, there is a reason they are called criminals...

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (7)
Report as
You obviously don't know there is no such thing as an assault rifle. It is a made up term by the media and politicians, for rifles that look like a military style rifle with a hand grip. They all fire one billet per trigger pull. Also the so called clips that hold multiple bullets often jam and are pretty much worthless.
All gun laws are illegal unless the Constitution is amended and that ain't going to happen.
Report as
Btw there are also reasons we have the God given right to defend ourselves from those criminals in both private and public life.
Report as
I got news for you, a large number of those clips work just the way they are supposed to.
Report as
wickedpissah
bigred- God doesn't give you any rights. The only rights you have are granted to you by the United States Constitution.
Report as
I came back from from deployment months ago and I shoot over 100 rounds in a day when I go to the range...
Report as
Oh and I have the basic human right to defend myself... Which is protected by the 2nd amendment
Report as
Yes and the Supreme Court has ruled that does not give you the right to own anything you want
Report as
Add a comment...

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people--lots and lots of them when the guns are rapid-fire weapons with high-capacity magazines.

Every time the subject of control comes up, the gun fanatics come out swinging with accusations that the government wants to take away all their guns and trash the 2nd Amendment. While I favor intelligent gun control, I absolutely do NOT advocate for disarming the public. I think we all agree that no private citizen should be allowed to own a nuclear-tipped missile and missile launcher. So the only question to be answered is where does the regulation stop. I would prefer that my neighbor does not have an AR-15 on the off chance he goes off the deep end one day, or if anyone in his house (family, guest, or otherwise) gets unauthorized access to it.

So to my mind, assault-style weapons should be banned. I also would prefer not to live in a wild west society where people are walking around with loaded pistols strapped to their waists.

Helpful (5) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (9)
Report as
icic6772
What's wrong with having a powerful rifle? Not all assault rifle looking weapons are fully automatic.
Report as
icic6772
And depending on where you live (I live in Texas) chances are several people are packing heat but you can't notice it. That's what a concealed handgun license is for. And for that I'm sure they do thorough background checks.
Report as
@Icic: I have no problem with a powerful rifle. I was referring to assault rifles with high-capacity clips which are designed for maximum damage in a short amount of time. As for concealed weapon permits, that's fine with me since, as you say, they must submit to thorough background checks. That, at least, meets the "well regulated" portion of the 2nd Amendment.
Report as
The AR-15 is not more powerful than any other regular semi automatic rifle. It is just cosmetically different and frightens people that are not familiar with fire arms. "assault rifles" are fully automatic weapons used in the military. The weapons available today in America are SEMI AUTOMATIC.
Report as
I don't care what it looks like. When a shooter can fire a weapon with a high-capacity magazine as fast as he can pull the trigger, a lot of damage can still be done in a minimal amount of time. How many bullets need to be in a magazine if one is hunting bear or dispatching an intruder? More than 10? More than 20?
Report as
your obviously scared its ok, go to church
Report as
@Baya: People with guns are the ones who are scared. I realize armed intruders could break in on us, but our family has made a choice to keep arms out of our home. We refuse to live in fear of things which rarely happen, but when they do, simple loss of property is the far more likely outcome. We are also aware of the statistics which say it is 22 times more likely that an innocent person will be harmed by a gun in a home than will a bad guy. It just makes more since to not have one than to have one. But you are free to take whatever risks you want.
Report as
I prefer my neighbor had an AR 15 on the not so off chance that my house is broken into when I'm out of town or I get shot so that he can protect my kids, wife, and my not yet born child in my wife... Also if in my neighbors house I heard a gun shot and he went on a spree I would end it very quickly...
Report as
Like I said, if you are willing to look at the 22-to-1 odds that a loved one or some other innocent will be harmed rather than an intruder when that gun is used, be my guest.
Report as
Add a comment...

Yes they should be banned. Not much to add to the excellent explanations above. I feel obliged to add my vote to counter those on the other side; but note that this site has a disproportionate number of angry white guys.

Helpful (3) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (9)
Report as
True dat last part of your comment!
Report as
icic6772
You want guns BANNED? Or you want stricter gun control? (Sorry for all caps. No bold)
Report as
@Icic: His use of the word "they" refers to the OPs reference to "military style assault rifles". Not all guns. Gun fanatics seem to have a hard time making that level of discernment for some reason.
Report as
Thanks Caltex you're right. Have to admit I don't know the precise definition of those (or the difference between fully-automatic, semi-automatic, and (manual?)), but the military should have a monopoly on military weapons.
Report as
Enjoy your FEMA camp.
Report as
He, you are a prime example of someone I don't want with an assault rifle... FEMA camp, rotflmfao
Report as
I'm a white guy myself, so I'm not racist, just a little embarrassed.
Report as
Your picture is of you any a young girl, my youngest daughter is 3 and I have a little mystery gendered baby on the way. I would die to protect my family and I have 2 sons and 1 more daughter who I don't want murdered or rapped, so I have means to protect them... And if you were my neighbor and I hear a scream in your house at night I would check up on it and make sure nobody stabbed you and was rapping your loved ones.
Report as
Well thanks. People should look out for one another.
Report as
Add a comment...

He hasn't the Constitutional authority to do that. You want a dictator or what?

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
I didn't see that the OP wanted Obama to ban assault weapons--even if he could without legislation passed by Congress. I think it would have been better worded if the word "Obama" had been replaced with the words "the government".
Report as
@caltec you are correct. Lol I wasn't thinking straight my bad.
Report as
Add a comment...

That would be unconstitutional, and we would start to become a fascist police state. It's a cycle, it will happen if we don't change things. The question isn't pro guns or anti guns, it's liberty or death!

Helpful (4) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (6)
Report as
Baloney, nothing in the constitution says there can't be common sense limits on what people own. We've had this ban before and "they" didn't come take our guns
Report as
The ban didn't help at all. Look at the Statistics for god sakes.
Report as
Then we need to improve the ban.
Report as
Ah the constitution gives us the rights to seek our own happiness and ownership of things makes me happy.
Report as
And we have limits on things that would make me happy. I'm not allowed to drive 100 mph, I can't own a flamethrower, etc
Key words red, common sense limits
Report as
If you first read the laws that have already been put on the books as of now. Then look at the cumquats we have in office running things, you will never again use the term "common sense" with a straight face.
Government IS the problem. And bigger government is bigger problems. Gun control is not about guns. It is about CONTROL!!!
Report as
Add a comment...

Won't matter to me, I already have my share

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
Me too but I want my children to have some of their own, and to expand on my collection once I die...
Report as
Add a comment...

Banning is not the American way banning and censoring is communist way America is about our freedoms not banning

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (14)
Report as
So we should be free to own hand grenades, nuclear missiles, and B1 bombers? How about heroine and methamphetamine? How about printing our own money for purchases? American freedom actually RELIES on some things being banned.
Report as
Without rules there will be total chaos.
Report as
I never said break the rules ca tex is funny but not accurate
Report as
I love to fallow rules rules are ment to be fallowed but banning is wrong and censoring is wrong
Report as
Haha ur guys arguments are ridicules. Who said anything about nuclear weapons.
Report as
@Bernie: Exceptions are used to prove a rule. The point is that virtually everyone is okay with some form of gun control. We just disagree on what level of control is appropriate. But banning all firearms is not wanted or warranted. We just need to decide which ones should be banned (RPGs and automatic weapons) and which should not (low capacity ammo clips) and what restrictions should be placed on those that are not banned (background checks and waiting periods).

@Flybynight: Your answer above was not saying anything about rules. You said we should not ban or censor. All of the examples I gave you are things we ban which, as a society, we accept as prudent. I didn't even address the issue of censorship. Are you saying we should allow girly magazines with images of people engaged in sex acts to be in full view by children in the checkout lane at the grocery store? If not, you are okay with censorship. Are you okay with having your neighbor own a functioning rocket launcher? If not, you are okay with bans. Luckily, society is fine with censorship and bans in both cases which allows them the freedom to have their kids in line with them at the grocery checkout without having to be on the lookout of inappropriate images, and the freedom to not live in fear of their neighbor someday going crazy and blowing up the neighborhood.

These examples may seem silly, but I am illustrating a point.
Report as
Actually we should be free to own anything that the government owns since we the people rule.
Report as
Big red is here to save the day once again
Report as
If each of us can own anything the govt owns, each of us should be able to do anything the govt does. Declare war, levy taxes to fund it, draft people to fight in it.
Report as
Very interesting each person has there place in the world they must do that but on the othere hand no censoring and no banning unless its banning books
Report as
@Flyby: I'm not sure I understood your last comment. Particularly the part about "no censoring and no banning unless its banning books".
Report as
Cal, I'm not sure that fly actually thinks about what she posts... It's very stream if conscious.
Report as
And reds back with her over the top ideas.
Report as
One hiss and 2 scratches for boo a silent stair with arched back and a growl
Report as
Add a comment...

Realistically speaking, no hunter or sportsman worth his salt would want to use an assault rifle in his/her sport. As a US citizen I have the right to own any weapon I can afford. Also, as a US citizen I strongly believe assault weapons, non-sporting weapons should be documented, controlled, and users be required to take courses and pass a test before being allowed to purchase one. Also they should be required to prove they can secure one safely.
Regulations will not prevent future incidents. A criminal or a mentally disturbed person inclined to committing such acts and given the opportunity will find a way to carry out their plans. Safety and security and deterrents at the locations (malls, schools, work place etc) are the key to preventing, eliminating, containing, limiting such acts.

But all that costs money. Security and safety is great till it becomes inconvenient or costly. At that point cuts are made and that weakens or basically eliminates any real attempts at security and safety.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (5)
Report as
Great answer! but I actually know a couple people that like hunting with semi auto AR-15s, ak 47s, FAL, etc
Report as
That is why all those who can legally carry, after all your requirements listed, should be allowed to carry everywhere. It would be a deterrent to those who would do harm not knowing who might have a weapon to fire back at them. How many killings have you heard about at a firing range? I know the gun haters like to bring up Columbine but those armed guards were outside not near where the shootings happened. I am sure the shooters knew their schedule and where they would be. That is why paid security (or advertising who is holding) might not be the answer. We the legal, well trained and licensed people are. And are free to boot.
Report as
Yes bernie I know a hunter or two who use high cal automatic weapons but they do it infrequently.
Report as
bigred I agree.
Report as
AR15s and AK47/74 platform rifles are not high caliber... But are great for mid sized game... And are great to defend your home with because they won't kill your neighbor like a deer rifle would (because they won't go through the intruder and a wall; whereas, a deer rifle like a 30-06 will penetrate a lot of stuff)
Report as
Add a comment...

Only if there was an emergency so yes

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
Do you have an answer?
Answer this question...
Did you mean?
Login or Join the Community to answer
Popular Searches