New Zealand to ban military style semi-automatic weapons...

"In the middle of a city the gunman shot people for seven continuous minutes, left the area to another mosque across the city, nearly fifteen minutes away, and killed seven more people until he was confronted by a potential victim who was worshiping at the mosque when it came under attack. According to Abdul Aziz, he first confronted the shooter by throwing a credit card machine at him, then ducking behind cars to prevent being shot, only to chase him down again after picking up a gun the terrorist had dropped earlier.

Abdul Aziz prevented more bloodshed with his decisive and aggressive response. He used improvised tools as well as the shooters own gun to stop the attack. The State and the police on the other hand were unable to respond in a timely manner. They did eventually stop him and now believe that he was on his way to a third mosque. The mantra, “when seconds count, cops are just minutes away” has renewed weight after this mass shooting. In fact, intelligence agencies set the stage by averting their gaze from white nationalist organizing under their nose and ignoring right wing extremism entirely from their intelligence gathering.

A blanket disarming of an entire populace under the barrel of police and military guns is just the thing a State with a terrified and vulnerable community do. Assuredly, if firearms were to remain available, Muslims and members of other targeted communities would begin to arm up in earnest, which is too threatening and challenging to the established order. The government did however manage to ignore warnings from within the community about the gun club the shooter was a member of. They were told by a concerned member of the community who had visited the gun club that members openly Islamophobic and proudly displaying confederate flags – proving once again that it’s a symbol of white terrorism. The concerned person was given no serious thought by authorities."

- Anarchist & Antifascist Thoughts on The New Zealand Shooting

 

Only nuts who want to go into combat with other humans want all that ammunition. People who truly hunt are not concerned since you don't need to shoot much. But if you plan to fight guerilla style for months you want a lot. If you think the abilty to buy is gone you want a lot. Of all the guns I've been around only militia members buy 1,000 of rounds several times a year. Everyone else goes to Walmart that day and buys enough to carry. This fact is known to most people. So long term laws that regulate this are likely.

The Ak-47 is specifricly deigned for military applications not hunting with full auto fire (either from you or the manufacture) and very powerful rounds that can penetrate some armors. It has no place in your own argument of hunting or defense. A shotgun is the best for the close quarter fighting you are looking for.

Ak is for long range and multi-target. Shotguns are not good for war unless you are in the trench with them. Maybe why only one Marine will have one most have the m-16.

You want it for this reason. IF you needed to fight Uncle Sam it's good. Only drawback vs m-16 uncle sam has is the ak is not as accurate.

 

Are you saying only nuts join the military? First off, it depends on what you're hunting. For example wild hogs can be lethal at close range so if you miss, you'll have fast follow ups. Second, AR15s and AKs both have 5-10 round magazines.

See above.

Those are rookie numbers. You need at least 500 rounds to break in a new gun and many times that to keep your skills sharp.

Civilian AKs are not automatic. Also the 7.62x39 commonly used by the AK is LESS powerful than rounds commonly used in the classic hunting rifle.

Says you.

That's debatable.

Actually, it was designed for intermediate ranges. Meaning it was designed like a Jack of all trades. It's not specifically intended for long range shooting. In fact it never was.

Then why is the Remington 870, Mossberg 590, and Benelli M4 issued to our military today? They still have there place.

You state that the AK is for long range shooting in one sentence and then state here that they're not accurate? Which is it?

 

Lol, all the knowledge comes from Battlefield and Call of Duty games, man.

 

An old time 30-30 works just fine on hogs

 

Many people aren't hunting hogs for fun like the gentleman with the bow. They're hunting hogs because they're an invasive species that are destroying their crops. They may not be expert hunters. but still need to protect their land from a dangerous invasive species.

Assault riffles get the attention because of mass shootings, but the US's gun problem are primarily with handguns.

*I don't know why they used all shades of blue for their chart.

 

Really Lode, I acknowledge your arguments. But I'm also certain one doesn't need to hunt/scare off those hogs with an assault rifle. That's an unneccesary choice to make.

 

You probably don't. But I'm a city boy and the most dangerous animals I come across are these bastards. They'll dive bomb your head in the Spring.



Just trying to put myself in the place of someone who does farming. Mass shootings are a problem, and really the only need for assault weapons is man-slaying.

That said, I think I'm more in favor of tightening background checks, preventing crazy people from getting guns, and dealing with mental health problems and the growth of hate groups then I am an all out ban on semi-automatic weapons.

 

One well placed shot can kill anything. That's not the argument. The argument is what if you miss or don't have a good shot to kill a hog with one shot? Even our special forces has an average accuracy of 5 shots.

I never stated that they're needed. I stated that they have there place. Not many people are good at bow hunting and I'd like to see you being accurate and fast with a bow if you have one charging at you, much less a whole herd.

 

The far majority of assault rifle owners never sees a wild hog (or other animal) charging at them or even buys it for that purpose.

 

I'm for a total ban on guns and diesel pickups. Just look at what these militia guys did in Oregon at the bird sanctuary, the state general assembly, and in New Mexico at the border. We need to take away their guns and put them in re-education camps.

 

They could go to the store and buy some bacon if they are afraid of live pigs?

 

Just like money...even if we have all we need, some need more.

Although a bow is sufficient to supply food, for some it won't seem as effective in killing feelings of powerlessness and fear as an AR15 will.

 

You can never be 100% safe while hunting, especially dealing with wild and dangerous animals. If I hunt, I'm taking every practical precautions as possible. You saying that is like wanting to remove airbags and then saying that if you can't drive safely then either take your chances or don't drive. How about you don't dictate what I hunt with and let me make that decision for myself.

You're talking about someone potentially being maimed or killed if they missed, not simply losing out on a successful hunt and a head mount. Think what you will about hunting, but don't be dismissive about missing a shot when even Special Forces aren't held to such standards.

 

Why diesel pickups of all things?

 

Hogs are considered vermin in some areas. So we need hunters to keep the population in check.

 

I like to irritate bullies.