BULLDOG
Diamond Member
- Jun 3, 2014
- 94,442
- 30,624
- 2,250
The AR15 is better suited for killing large amounts of people in as short a time as possible in a wider range of environments than pistols or shotguns. The military determined that, and I trust their judgement.
You'll have to provide me with a source or a link for that. Not that I doubt it, but just so I can see what the overall conclusion is.
But anyway, first of all, the military doesn't use the AR-15. Secondly, military soldiers are trained to use these weapons (M16s) with as much skill as possible. Thirdly, most military combat takes place in the open so pistols and shotguns are useless in these environments and it would be silly to compare the two. Fourthly, an M16 may serve the purpose in close quarters combat but soldiers have other people shooting back. A mass shooter does not.
Also, unlike a soldier, a mass shooter can always choose his battleground. This is precisely why they choose schools, restaurants and offices to get the maximum kill effect. And, again, given that handguns were used in some of the worst shootings, it's all pretty much academic.
What concerns myself and a lot of gun owners about all this is that we all know that if they ban semi-autos, it won't stop there. That would be the wedge to open the door and set a precedent to justify future bans. No one on this side of the gun debate aisle is fooled for one minute by conciliatory and concessionary rhetoric. We know that ultimately they want to ban firearms altogether.
You're exaggerating the situation. There is no credible effort to ban all semi auto guns any more than there is to ban all guns. That is just a lie told by the NRA to scare weak minded gun nuts.
First of all, I have no idea what the NRA says because I'm not a member and I don't keep up with their goings on. Secondly, I'm not merely repeating things other gun owners are saying, I'm speaking from experience of observing human nature. Human nature dictates that they will always look for the easiest solution and convince themselves it will work even though most of the time the easy solution never works in the long run and they know this.
What is likely to happen is that there will be more shootings with more subsequent rallies and campaigns to ban semi-autos until the government finally breaks and grants it. They'll be happy and do a celebratory jig and revel in their moral victory. For awhile. Then, inevitably, there will be another mass shooting either with an illegally obtained semi-auto or a pistol and/or shotgun. They'll know then that banning semi-autos didn't work but they'll never admit it. So they'll say that all firearms are the problem but will only push for a ban on handguns for now. When that doesn't work they'll say, "Well, we should have went for a total ban the last time" and therefore push for a total ban.
They will never admit that the root of the problem is cultural and a result of bad or absent parenting, among other things, because that's not an easy fix. You can't pass a law that will fix bad parenting or repair the culture.
Again, you reference your unfounded fear that there is a credible possibility that all semi auto guns will be banned. That's just nuts.
I have to ask: What makes you so sure they won't ban semi-autos?
The main reason is there is no main stream group, or credible individuals who have said there is even the possibility that might be done. Some specific guns might require additional approval, but not all semi autos. If you know of any credible threat to all semi autos please inform me. Of course the gun nut group is screaming it to high heavens. It stirs up their base and increases gun sales.