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

Why do some people in the US think their guns will be taken away?

Many of us would like to see assault weapons and large magazine clips banned. They serve no practical use. Why the diversionary tactic of saying this is an attempt to take your guns? And, you might as well blame the 20 dead kids from Sandy Hook as the politicians trying to avoid more deaths.

Report as

Large clips have no purpose?
You are obviously uninformed.
Unlike what you see in TV and movies ... a .45 to the chest will not throw a person backwards, and kill them. Police are trained to keep shooting until the person goes down. Sometimes, especially in the case of someone on drugs, this results in multiple gunshots to the chest.

(I know one officer that fired 7 shots into the person's chest, before they went down ... the person got up to their knees, and flipped the officer off with both hands before falling over and dying.)

Now, if it takes even 4 shots to the chest to put an attacker down ... and there are multiple attackers - - would you rather risk your life trying to change magazines after firing only 2 more shots, or use the "high capacity" of (eg) 15 rounds to defend yourself against the other attackers?

Personally, I'd rather have the capability to put down ALL attackers without having to worry about running the magazine empty on the first person.

Helpful (2) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (5)
Report as
Derek54
i cant believe it, but i agree with you walt
Report as
That's when you use hydroshock ammo instead of regular ammo. More damage = less shots. Plus, that's why if someone is going to own a gun for self defense, they need training on using it in a stressful situation. Not saying it should be federally required or anything, but in reality the usual reason that people run out of ammo is not because of multiple attackers, but because of wild shooting.
Report as
Oh my god, I said the same exact thing on a similar post and everyone hated me.
Report as
Personally I'd just call the police. Hope you never have to apply your strategy.
Report as
Wall ... average police response time (around here, anyway) is 6 minutes AFTER they get dispatched by 911. Add another 1-2 minutes for them to be dispatched. That's 8 minutes for the criminal to injure or kill you. > Average response time to pull a gun from a holster ... less than 30 seconds. > Perhaps that's why FBI statistics say there are over 2 million violent crimes prevented by firearms.

Remember, police are under NO duty to protect you.
Multiple courts, at the state and federal level, have confirmed that.
Report as
Add a comment...

Exactly as you said, its a diversionary tactic. No one is trying to "disarm America" but a few people are shouting at the top of their lungs that their rights are being violated. It's just a way to get attention away from what is REALLY happening.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
No it's not these are our rights we shouldn't e punished for other peoples crimes! Second amendment-right to bear arms!
Report as
Ignoring the argument over what the second amendment is ACTUALLY meant for, my point is that no one is trying to ban ALL of the guns, which is the first diversionary tactic. Second, no one is trying to TAKE AWAY the guns you have. You really need to understand what is happening, rather than depending on news headlines.
Report as
Add a comment...

because the president we have. he's affraid a real american will assassinate him. and the government are chickens... so if they ban fire arms, they wont have to worry about anything.
its americans rights to own a fire arm, and use them when needed.

Helpful Fun Thanks for voting Comments (4)
Report as
Do your research. He's not banning guns in general, and we've already had assault weapons bans in the past.
Report as
John F. Kennedy
Report as
Get real!. It only takes one person, with any gun, to perform an assassination. No way will all guns be taken away. This is just more Obama bashing.
Report as
I like you @wall1
Report as
Add a comment...

Banning guns isn't going to help.
30 years ago there was an assault rifle ban. Still there are no killing declinations

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

because there are no reasons for guns except to threat or or kill or seriously injor which is not right and they want to stop threats and deaths.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (9)
Report as
hello
Report as
Guns don't kill people people kill people. And plus there are gun collectors
Report as
Agree with both. Military-style weapons are not good for hunting and they are even more impractical for home defense. Their main purpose in civilian posession is for collecting and for sport/target shooting.
Report as
Slap a folding stock and pistol grip on a Mossberg shotgun ... and it becomes an "assault weapon".

Ridiculous stupidity.
Report as
Yeah
Report as
I worry about some of the gun owners. One once said "Im not responsible for the bullet once it leaves my gun". Stupid statement.
Report as
Agreed Wall1. Very, VERY stupid. My worry has always been the responsibility and the abilities of the owners themselves.
Report as
The Clackamas shooting, days before the Newtown CT shooting, was stopped by a law-abiding citizen with a CCW. The citizen didn't fire, because of other innocents behind the criminal. But the very presence of someone able to shoot back, caused the criminal to retreat and take his own life without killing more innocents.
Report as
@Walt_OReagun - the problem is a citizen who wouldn't know to not shoot, or even worse, panic and shoot wildly. Sadly it's too easy to be uneducated in firearms AND still own one. CCW procedures vary county to county - whether legal variations, or just a lazy teacher (yes, seen those.) But I also doubt that the person you speak of carried anything larger than a pistol.
Report as
Add a comment...

paranoia. but honestly, the common people in the US have no business owning military grade assault weapons in the first place.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (25)
Report as
why not if i want to buy an assault rifle with a pistle grip, and a extended clip thats not your business or anyone's even the presient's
Report as
if you need an extended clip on an ar, you're not only paranoid, but a terrible shot. it's everyone's business, who's to say you wont get drunk or cracked out one night and shoot some kid who's halloween costume scared you half to death. you sound like a republican, so ill accept your argument as ignorance.
Report as
Show me ONE person that owns a "military grade assault weapon", since 1968, where that weapon has been used in a crime.

Ohhhh, that's right. The only ones are police SWAT units, who break into the wrong person's house and kill innocent civilians.
Report as
once again, republican argument. arguing with people like youself is like playing chess with a pigeon, no matter how well thought out and maneuvered the plays are made, the pigeon will only knock the pieces over and fly back to its flock claiming victory.
Report as
What if a military man gets drunk what if he is I the military but is on break or whatever you call it and he has a gun there's no difference cops and swat kill innocent people and the people that kill people are crazy soo...
Report as
and once again the stupid democrat is going to compare me to a pigeon without hearing my argument
Report as
Actually, dntwryisaveu ... you're the ignorant one.
Since 1968, the only way to buy a "military grade assault weapon" is to go through a federal background check and pay a $200 tax (on top of the regular taxes). Not one of those weapons in the hands of a civilian has ever been used in a crime.

The ignorance is to claim semi-auto weapons are "military grade".

It is also a red herring to do the "what if".
Is our government going to dispose of our nuclear arsenal, because "what if the president got drunk and launched a nuclear strike"?
Report as
i heard your argument, and the pigeon quote wasn't to you. and gigiloy, most military personnel are not allowed to carry their assault weapons off base, there is a weapons locker where guns are stored for off duty personnel. most of the weapons carried by them are personal, and are typically hand guns.
Report as
@epicsauce1 I think you are very intelligent and we would get along great!
Report as
and did you know that the number 10 murder wepon is an assult rifle and whats the number 1 a baseball bat. so if that idiot of a preident is going to take away anything WHY not baseball bats.
Report as
@,Dntwrtisaveu people like you make me so mad because you're so idiotic
Report as
im the ignorant one, yet you're completely missing the point. haha, i never said anything about semi automatic. i said military grade assault weapons. if you want to argue, find some actual facts, other than what google throws at you. point is, the common american has no business with assault weapons. its pure paranoia. and i dont trust people paranoid enough to say "i need this ar to protect my homestead" and i never said i was democratic, homie. :) i hold values ive acquired from republican, democratic, and liberal. yet i find myself amused when radical republicans attempt to argue something that shouldnt be argued. stay off fox news for a day or so, maybe things will become a bit more clear.
Report as
Gigiloy... They don't let you bring your guns home on Break Time.
Report as
We should be able to have whatever guns we want and if they didn't want us to have them they shouldn't have made them in the first place
Report as
you cant control what people make for a profit. thats all war and violence is, a way to turn a profit. A common day to day american should be able to own a bazooka? or a flame-thrower? perhaps not, but then again why not! we're american and can have and do as we please! this is why most of the world hates america. Obama is only doing what he feels is the right direction to protect the american people and put this mess behind us, but no one ever argued about bush when he used his executive powers to protect schools of fish.
Report as
btw, that you Nova. Most educated person on this thread.
Report as
thank*
Report as
Obama is an idiot do you know there are 11 states that have more people on welfare than actually working obama is doing a great job? NO!
Report as
and where did we start this radical decline of employment rates and overall peace in america? after bush was elected. Obama is doing the best he can for what he was given. This country has been screwed up and over ever since Clinton was found guilty in his affair. Its not Obama's fault for this bull. The president is only a scape goat. he has no power over major corporations who chose to liquidate their assests and move over seas. He has no control over what the senate says and does. He has no power to give a job to ever american in this country, especially the ones who sit around and complain about how he isnt doing anything. Most of those people CHOSE to be on welfare. most of those people made poor life choices that led to the screwed up situations they live in, but by all means, lets just blame the president who's still trying to clean up the mess americans let unfold for 8 years under baby bush's rein.
Report as
He could outlaw welfare that better than outlawing guns people need to get of their lazy vitts and do something people complain and say well how am I gonna provide for my 11 children and well get a job you shouldn't have had that many kids then and Obama shouldn't even be the president he was born in Kenya not in the united states and Obama has this big plan for America well has it happened yet? Nope
Report as
Butts* not vitts
Report as
it is happening. the problem is the media. we have to many radical republicans telling people what they think. What did bush accomplish? nothing but a little yard work on his land in texas. If we were to outlaw all welfare, what would the elderly who cant work do? are we to really take away the only income families with these 11 kids have and let the children suffer? yes, the parents may have made bad choices and some are even abusing the welfare system by wasting money on fashion and high end goods, but some of these people didnt chose this life. he's not outlawing all guns, just the guns that the common american actually doesnt need. this is to attempt to prevent more incidents like sandy hook, all the theater murders, more college shootings. take a look at this website, where his 23 executive orders are listed. in here there are arguments from the NRA and others about this, but they all stand behind him in some way or another. maybe this will add a little clarity to those arguing against Obama, because FOX just wont tell the truth, never has told the truth, never will tell the truth. Why? Obama is a black democrat who is trying to clean up a republican mess. They just refuse to see the big picture, this is more important than who's side you chose, this is bigger than you or me, this is not about our freedoms and who has the right to own what.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/
Report as
but i have to say, you do make a good point about him being born in kenya. But, he is a U.S. citizen, has lived here for majority of his life, and there are certain loop holes in the requirements of US govern-ship that even allowed Arnold Schwarzenegger, born in Austria with no government background, to be elected as governor of California.
Report as
@ dntwryisaveu: " i never said anything about semi automatic. i said military grade assault weapons"

The phrase "military grade assault weapons" is misused by the media, to refer to semi-auto firearms that have certain cosmetic features.

If you were actually referring to true military grade firearms ... I apologize.

Though nothing in Obama's Executive Orders, or any "gun ban" under consideration, makes it any more difficult for a citizen to purchase a true military-grade firearm. And no such weapon has been used by a citizen since 1968 to commit a crime.
Report as
Wow, this really blew up while I was gone. If I am the most educated person on this thread, (as quoted above) then it's pretty odd that I'm just a highschool freshman. However, if you know what the Japanese Chi-Nu tank is, it has armor that pretty much every small firearm can penetrate, so if you can take out a tank with a rifle, I don't really think you need a bazooka for home defense. It's just messy.
Report as
Add a comment...

There's reasons for guns like hunting protecting yourself like say you had a robbery maybe they didn't have a gun but what if they have a knife yes we might get our guns taken away for stupid reasons like the criminals are going to obey the law? Heck no! They'll find some way to get them

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (8)
Report as
What about the second amendment? The right to bear arms!
Report as
We live in a time where a man can walk down the street and buy whatever gun they want with no liscence at all
Report as
I know it's just screwed up!
Report as
Set in place a law and then the police can DO something about the criminals. As it is now, there isn't a federal database and there are incredible loopholes in background check procedures. But do you really think that you'll be able to carry an assault weapon? Heck no! If you carry it'll be a handgun.

Besides, what do you know about home defense? Did you know that you should consider the penetration ability of the weapon and ammo? You should if you don't want to shoot through walls! Do you think could handle an assault rifle in a home invasion? Not the average home owner. You'd be better off with a shotgun or handgun.
Report as
In Wyoming a man was leaving to go to the store he left his daughter home alone she's 11 and 2 men come and try to rob the place little did they know she was a champion clay pigeon Shooter and she shot one of them and the the other man was downstairs and he heard a gun he. Thought it was the other man shooting but she sit him and he died now while the other guy was coming up the stairs the girl had only a little crack of the door to short through and guess what she shot him and he went outside and died now what if that little girl hadn't had a gun hmm? What would have happened to her she couldn't call the police
Report as
Shot him not sit sorry I'm on mobile autocorrection
Report as
2nd amendment also seems to be implying that the states have the right to arm their militias - so the great debate goes on.
Report as
gigiloyloy, at eleven years old the girl should not have been left home in the first place. Besides that, as I said in response to another of your posts, the ban is NOT for all guns, just certain types of guns. And the focus is really about improving EXISTING regulations.
Report as
Add a comment...

its obamas fault or however you spell his name its on the news

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (1)
Report as
No it isn't. Maybe the fault of the mom for not seeing son's problem and not locking up her guns
Report as
Add a comment...

I believe gun laws should be reconsidered! I don't think people need guns on a day to day basis! I live in Virginia where gun laws are very loose! I hope my state and our country can change the laws soon!

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

Many assume that its a slippery slope. First go the automatic guns, then semiautomatic, then anything with a clip (surely you don't need 10 bullets), eventually, possibly, all guns. I don't think this way of thinking is too far fetched. It's exactly what has happened in other countries, like here in Canada. We cannot walk around with a weapon of any kind, and more, most provinces have banned armor. So not only can you not have a weapon to defend yourself, but if you live in a bad area and are afraid of getting shot, you can't have a bulletproof vest.

Helpful (1) Fun Thanks for voting Comments (0)
Report as
Add a comment...
Derek54

well, i myself do not like guns at all. however, i dont necessarily support the propositions that are being made. the way i see it, there is no point in banning assault weapons or high capacity magazines because the majority of school and other public shootings of the US are from pistols and hunting rifles, and from what ive heard, the news twisted the sandy hook story because there was not actually an assault weapon used although he did have one in the car. Also, even though i dont like guns or shooting or hunting, there are a lot of people who do, and we shouldnt punish them for what one person did. from what i hear, target practice with an assault weapon is great fun especially when you dont have to stop every 5 seconds and reload your clip. Basically, i dont see much good of strict gun laws because it just punishes the general population and doesnt much affect those who would want to cause harm with one.

Helpful (2) Fun (1) Thanks for voting Comments (2)
Report as
Exactly!
Report as
When you're right you're right. You are definitely right.
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