Shoud Obama renew the Assault Weapons...

Shoud Obama renew the Assault Weapons Ban?

Created by -Spartan- on Feb 26, 2009

70 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Absolutey Not

I Don't Know

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Why Not

United States

#1 Feb 26, 2009
Sure why not.
Weylon

United States

#2 Feb 26, 2009
Spartan, what exactly is your definition of an "Assault Weapon."
YO YO YO

Natchitoches, LA

#3 Feb 26, 2009
spartan he don't want any of us brothers to have guns! he be hatin on us if we strapped! i say the hell with him! we gonna get ours! B ! T C H!!!!!

“Escaped to The North”

Level 2

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#4 Feb 26, 2009
Again, I didn't start this thread. Remember, if I would have started this poll, the name would have appeared in blue, not grey. Someone obviously wants to be me.

I'm flattered.

But, since you asked. No, I don't think the assault weapons ban should be reinstated. Criminals buy their weapons out of the trunks of cars and in back alleys. It won't stop them from getting what they desire. The only thing it will do is keep normal citizens from being able to protect themselves.

If Johnny Troublemaker has an AK-47 under his mattress and comes knockin' at my door with 7.62x39, then I want to be able to return fire with equal, if not superior firepower.

My philosophy on guns has always been, an armed society is a polite society.
RealCurious

Mount Pleasant, TX

#5 Feb 26, 2009
"My philosophy on guns has always been, an armed society is a polite society."quotes Spartan

Spartan , I totally disagree . Our society is armed and blood runs in the streets daily . Maybe , an educated society is a polite society ?

“Escaped to The North”

Level 2

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#6 Feb 26, 2009
RealCurious wrote:
"My philosophy on guns has always been, an armed society is a polite society."quotes Spartan
Spartan , I totally disagree . Our society is armed and blood runs in the streets daily . Maybe , an educated society is a polite society ?
I can agree, to an extent.

An educated society is perhaps more civil, but not always nice and polite. I just don't believe that taking away gun rights will make crime go away. It's a felony to possess a pistol in Chicago, yet more gun-crime takes place in Chicago than anywhere else in America.

The wolves don't give a damn about the law. So the law shouldn't hinder the sheep from protecting themselves when the sheepdog ain't around. Get what I'm sayin'?
RealCurious

Mount Pleasant, TX

#7 Feb 27, 2009
"The wolves don't give a damn about the law. So the law shouldn't hinder the sheep from protecting themselves when the sheepdog ain't around. Get what I'm sayin'? " quote Spartan

I really don't get what you are sayin. I never thought of you as militant until now. So , you live and die by the sword ? I am not attacking you at all , it's just frightening to think ,politeness occurs ,because of guns ,in your world.
dahling

AOL

#8 Feb 27, 2009
I am not quite sure exactly how to define "assault rifle", but my general feeling is that such should be banned permanently. Just the name suggests these guns have no use for hunting or protection. And the argument that citizens should have firepower equal to anything a criminal may have is ridiculous. Pipe bombs, machine guns, hand grenades, cop-killer bullets, and even stinger missiles are available for purchase on the black market. Should every American be allowed to own these just because a criminal may have one? Would you want to live next door to someone who did? I don't. I am a gun owner and I hunt when I have the time, but I would rather protect myself and my family with a shotgun than any old assault rifle.
Weylon

United States

#9 Feb 28, 2009
The problem with your argument about banning "Assault Rifles," is who determines the definition of an assault rifle..... The US Constitution guarantees individuals the right to keep and bear arms.

Guns do not kill people, people kill people.

It is just that simple. Death caused by any type of firearm is no where near the top of the list for the annual cause of death in the United States. As a matter of fact, Tobacco and Poor Diet are the leading causes of death. Homicides didn't even make the top 10 list.(Center for Disease Control Study)

So, I suppose that we should Ban cigarettes and Fast Food.

The ban is designed to slowly but surely disarm the US citizenry.
instigator

Plano, TX

#10 Feb 28, 2009
what would all you coonasses use to duck hunt with if you did not have an assult weapon
Not a Supporter

San Francisco, CA

#11 Mar 8, 2009
Assault rifles are another type of golf club for normal people. You people that think a ban on any weapon is a good thing are very trigger-happy people. There is no quick fix for any problem. I have never had any kind of charge, why is it ok to take anything of mine?
We will start having to give-up rolling pins, frying pans, baseball bats, and golf clubs too. Those do cause alot of "103D" calls for our goverment payrolls. Get real people, FREE COUNTRY for now.

“The Master of Time and Space”

Since: Jan 08

UNITED STATES

#12 Mar 19, 2009
dahling wrote:
I am not quite sure exactly how to define "assault rifle", but my general feeling is that such should be banned permanently. Just the name suggests these guns have no use for hunting or protection. And the argument that citizens should have firepower equal to anything a criminal may have is ridiculous. Pipe bombs, machine guns, hand grenades, cop-killer bullets, and even stinger missiles are available for purchase on the black market. Should every American be allowed to own these just because a criminal may have one? Would you want to live next door to someone who did? I don't. I am a gun owner and I hunt when I have the time, but I would rather protect myself and my family with a shotgun than any old assault rifle.
Well your wrong. An assult gun is a standard hunting riffle that is shaped like a army riffle. It is not a real machine gun it just looks like one.

Why should my gun be banned just because you do not like the way it looks its to scarry looking for you?

Its just like a hunting rifle i fact it uses a smaller bullet than a deer riffle so wheres the harm?

Why should a lower powered gun be banned just because you get scared when you look at it?

Myself I prefer a gun that looks scarry it gets rid of intruders faster without firing a shot.

“The Master of Time and Space”

Since: Jan 08

UNITED STATES

#13 Mar 19, 2009
Weylon wrote:
Spartan, what exactly is your definition of an "Assault Weapon."
The "Assault Weapon." is a semi-auto gun that looks like a machine gun. the internal workings ate the same as a normal gun it only looks like a army gun. In most all cases they use a smaller bullet than hunting rifles and are less powerfull.

“I'm here”

Level 6

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#14 Mar 24, 2009
I don't think so
JohnQ

Mount Pleasant, TX

#15 Mar 25, 2009
With all the killings lately ,it makes one wonder ...what is the answer ? Police are killed in Oakland , a family massacred recently , the Germany slayings, the Preacher shot while preaching & on & on ...... America's moral fiber is unraveling . Are "WE THE PEOPLE" going to be our own demise ?
Respectfully JQ
spooky tooth

United States

#16 Mar 25, 2009
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
----------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians,
unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
----------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million
Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and
exterminated.
----------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political
dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
----------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan
Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
----------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians,
unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
----------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977 , one million
educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
----------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because
of gun control: 56 million.
----------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new
law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own
Government, a program costing Australian taxpayers more than $500 million
dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.
Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not,
and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed
robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months,
since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased,
after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully
ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other
historical facts above prove it.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them
of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they
knew most Americans were armed!
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense.
The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than
either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.
Switzerland issues every household a gun!
Switzerland 's government trains every adult they issue a rifle.
Switzerland has the lowest gun related crime rate of any civilized country
in the world!!!
It's a no brainer! don't let our government waste millions of our tax dollars
in an effort to make all law abiding citizens an easy target.
I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment!
dahling

AOL

#17 Mar 25, 2009
tmaster wrote:
<quoted text> Well your wrong. An assult gun is a standard hunting riffle that is shaped like a army riffle. It is not a real machine gun it just looks like one. Why should my gun be banned just because you do not like the way it looks its to scarry looking for you? Its just like a hunting rifle i fact it uses a smaller bullet than a deer riffle so wheres the harm? Why should a lower powered gun be banned just because you get scared when you look at it? Myself I prefer a gun that looks scarry it gets rid of intruders faster without firing a shot.
I am not scared of guns. I am scared of how people use them. For the kind of hunting I do, I prefer a rifle. But, if I were an intruder, I think I would be more scared of a double-barrel shot gun than a rifle of any kind. We already limit gun ownership without endangering the 2nd amendment. Some weapons are just too dangerous or pose too high a risk to allow people to own them--such as hand grenades.
patty

Columbia, MO

#18 Apr 8, 2009
he should support the ban because assault weapons are only used for to kill people. It would help end black on black crime. Why allow another maniac to have access to these deadly weapons.
lolong

Corpus Christi, TX

#19 Feb 22, 2013
it all not auto
D_J_S

Winnfield, LA

#20 Feb 23, 2013
dahling wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not scared of guns. I am scared of how people use them. For the kind of hunting I do, I prefer a rifle. But, if I were an intruder, I think I would be more scared of a double-barrel shot gun than a rifle of any kind. We already limit gun ownership without endangering the 2nd amendment. Some weapons are just too dangerous or pose too high a risk to allow people to own them--such as hand grenades.
I am sorry, but this is entirely incorrect. A hand grenade is not a type of "gun" a firearm is a gun, a hand grenade is an explosive. It sounds to me that you are reaching, sir, and would do well to research such things. I'm not saying it should be okay for a civilian to own an ak-47 or an AR-15, but our right to own firearms should not be restricted because of a fire-arms appearance. To be honest, I would be a lot more afraid of someone bearing a .308 than someone with one of these assault rifles. The .308 is going to do a lot more damage, and that is just a simple hunting rifle.

Tell me again how a semi-automatic "assault rifle" should be banned only because of its name and its appearance?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Winnfield Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Cranford Sat loveofgod 7
8,000 post wins. (Feb '13) Sat texas pete 3,612
Add a word drop a word (Feb '10) Sat Icnoptnthis 2,168
Keep a word/Drop a word Game... (May '12) Sat Icnoptnthis 2,246
Hunting Nov 18 Askjeeves 3
Police Officer that Raped the 14 Year Old Girl (Oct '16) Nov 16 Willie p_ 21
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Nov 14 How kind of you 10

Winnfield Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Winnfield Mortgages