Do We Really Need Guns?

[westwall]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

Your opening statement is demonstrably, and proven false. All peer reviewed criminology studies show that firearms in the hands of citizens prevent more than 10 times as many crimes as are committed. And, the majority of violent crimes committed, is one bad guy attacking another bad guy.

With an opening statement as completely, and totally wrong as you started off with I suggest you actually DO some research on your own....and look at sources other than the crap you have been looking at. It's pathetic.

 

[Iceweasel]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

But it doesn't matter what you support or object to. That's the truth of the matter. I want the ability to own firearms, including my "assault" rifle and I have that as a right. Ican also carry weapons around as this is a shall issue state. In fact, I can open carry a side arm, although I choose not to. My choice, not yours.

But is do agree that liberals probably should not own one since they feel they are evil and act on their own accord.

 

[Iceweasel]

Desperado -

What about the rights of the victims of gun violence?

Or don't those people have rights?

What does that even mean? Can you put it into words? People do have the right to not be murdered, by guns, knives, chain saws or anything else.

 

[Iceweasel]

I have the synthetic stock, and appreciate the weight difference but miss the bayonet lug.

I don't think the .223 is appropriate for deer, but, I do use it on hogs cuz the ammo is cheap.

It's a proven performer for humans though. Mine is a .556 but shoots .223 ammo as well. But supposedly a .223 won't fire .556. Seems weird to me but I have a choice anyways.

 

[MXdad]

I have the synthetic stock, and appreciate the weight difference but miss the bayonet lug.

I don't think the .223 is appropriate for deer, but, I do use it on hogs cuz the ammo is cheap.

It's a proven performer for humans though. Mine is a .556 but shoots .223 ammo as well. But supposedly a .223 won't fire .556. Seems weird to me but I have a choice anyways.

If it is chambered in .556 your fine firing .223, however like you said don't fire .556 in a weapon chambered in .223. It will fire and many times everything will be OK as the bullet is the same size and overall length of the round is the same. The problem arises due to the pressure difference in the two rounds. The pressure difference is slight only about 5% according to most studies but it can lead to over pressure issues like popped primers or blown cartridge case heads. Bottom line your fine to fire .223. in a .556 but I would not advise .556 in a .223 chambered weapon. I always advise folks to go with .556 as you did because it gives you the flexibility of using .223 or .556

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

And it doesn't seem to have been noted here, but the key word in the thread premise is "need". Once we figure that out we might go somewhere.

One does not need to provide evidence of need to exercise a right.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Desperado -

What about the rights of the victims of gun violence?

Or don't those people have rights?

Less then 400 people a year are murdered with ALL types of rifles. That includes your supposed assault rifles. Remind me again how that averages out again?

 

[Zander]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

The argument for gun ownership is simple- it's in the Bill of Rights. Don't like it? Get it amended. Good luck with that.....

Meanwhile, Feel free to not own a gun. Nobody is forcing you to own one.

Personally, I own a shotgun and a handgun. I have plenty of ammo for both.....

 

[hjmick]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I'm a gun owner. I don't own guns for self protection. I own guns because I like them. I like to go down to the range and shoot them. I own a couple of golf clubs for self protection... Anyone breaks into my home, I would not hesitate to beat them to a bloody pulp...


Perhaps we should ban golf...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I'm a gun owner. I don't own guns for self protection. I own guns because I like them. I like to go down to the range and shoot them. I own a couple of golf clubs for self protection... Anyone breaks into my home, I would not hesitate to beat them to a bloody pulp...


Perhaps we should ban golf...

Perhaps we should ban golf...

If we did that, what would Obozo do?

 

[hjmick]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I'm a gun owner. I don't own guns for self protection. I own guns because I like them. I like to go down to the range and shoot them. I own a couple of golf clubs for self protection... Anyone breaks into my home, I would not hesitate to beat them to a bloody pulp...


Perhaps we should ban golf...

Perhaps we should ban golf...

If we did that, what would Obozo do?

Dang. I didn't think about that...

 

[Iceweasel]

I have the synthetic stock, and appreciate the weight difference but miss the bayonet lug.

I don't think the .223 is appropriate for deer, but, I do use it on hogs cuz the ammo is cheap.

It's a proven performer for humans though. Mine is a .556 but shoots .223 ammo as well. But supposedly a .223 won't fire .556. Seems weird to me but I have a choice anyways.

If it is chambered in .556 your fine firing .223, however like you said don't fire .556 in a weapon chambered in .223. It will fire and many times everything will be OK as the bullet is the same size and overall length of the round is the same. The problem arises due to the pressure difference in the two rounds. The pressure difference is slight only about 5% according to most studies but it can lead to over pressure issues like popped primers or blown cartridge case heads. Bottom line your fine to fire .223. in a .556 but I would not advise .556 in a .223 chambered weapon. I always advise folks to go with .556 as you did because it gives you the flexibility of using .223 or .556

Thanks. So it's the pressure, not the size. I remember choosing the .556 because it could fire both but didn't know exactly why.

 

[MXdad]

I have the synthetic stock, and appreciate the weight difference but miss the bayonet lug.

I don't think the .223 is appropriate for deer, but, I do use it on hogs cuz the ammo is cheap.

It's a proven performer for humans though. Mine is a .556 but shoots .223 ammo as well. But supposedly a .223 won't fire .556. Seems weird to me but I have a choice anyways.

If it is chambered in .556 your fine firing .223, however like you said don't fire .556 in a weapon chambered in .223. It will fire and many times everything will be OK as the bullet is the same size and overall length of the round is the same. The problem arises due to the pressure difference in the two rounds. The pressure difference is slight only about 5% according to most studies but it can lead to over pressure issues like popped primers or blown cartridge case heads. Bottom line your fine to fire .223. in a .556 but I would not advise .556 in a .223 chambered weapon. I always advise folks to go with .556 as you did because it gives you the flexibility of using .223 or .556

Thanks. So it's the pressure, not the size. I remember choosing the .556 because it could fire both but didn't know exactly why.

Yes it's all about pressure the two rounds are virtually the same size. Here is a good short article on the two

.223 Remington Vs. 5.56 What s in a Name - American Rifleman Mobile

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I totally agree with you, and congratulations on having the cojones to raise this issue.

Countries with less guns are almost always safer than the US, and that is simply a cold, hard truth that few gun rights fanatics are willing to admit.

I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting, but all of countries should have safety-based gun laws aimed at protecting life first and foremost. No one needs an assault rifle at home.

Right off the bat you contradict yourself, you said "I totally support peoples' right to own a gun for hunting or target shooting" Now why can't I use an "assault rifle" for target shooting? Now what is your definition of an "assault rifle" , and don't just say a scary looking rifle. You say " No one needs an assault rifle at home" that is the same logic as saying "No one needs a Porsche for driving". It gets down to simply in America we have a choice of what we can own and that should not be infringed upon because it scares you.

No he said "need". You dont need a gun you want one.

Need or want, doesn't make a difference the 2nd amendment protects our right to own a firearm.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

10 pages and 94 posts and peegreen hasn't once stood up to defend his/her position. Peegreen is a coward.

 

[Roadrunner]

I have the synthetic stock, and appreciate the weight difference but miss the bayonet lug.

I don't think the .223 is appropriate for deer, but, I do use it on hogs cuz the ammo is cheap.

It's a proven performer for humans though. Mine is a .556 but shoots .223 ammo as well. But supposedly a .223 won't fire .556. Seems weird to me but I have a choice anyways.

I think the only difference is the brass is thicker in the military ammo.

Externally they are the same, I shoot both in my Bushmaster and my SIG.

Same with .308 and the NATO 7.65 or 7.62. I don't even remember which is correct, I just shoot .308 Winchester in my M1-A.

 

[Roadrunner]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I'm a gun owner. I don't own guns for self protection. I own guns because I like them. I like to go down to the range and shoot them. I own a couple of golf clubs for self protection... Anyone breaks into my home, I would not hesitate to beat them to a bloody pulp...


Perhaps we should ban golf...

And baseball and carpentry too.

 

[Kondor3]

Do we really NEED guns?

Yes and No - depends upon the time and the situation.

Does our NEED for guns matter?

No.

The right of all Citizens to bear arms is guaranteed in the US Constitution.

This right is non-negotiable.

Is there anything else?

 

[NoNukes]

It's my first thread here, and I want to start with the issue, that worries me a lot.

Gun owners always claim that they own guns for self protection, even though the guns in their homes impose a much greater risk to their lives than an intruder. They also state they need guns to protect themselves from the government and from tthr police. Oh, seriously? Other argument for guns is hunting. Food production in the US is quite complex and capable of providing all types of foods to all parts of the country. And, if someone is too poor to buy food to eat, they are too poor to buy weapons. So what for?! Explain me, please.

I truly believe, that guns only do harm There is no use for guns in our society. The 2nd amendment was made in a time where guns were necessary because of the British.

I am in my 60s and have never needed a gun, and none of my friends have either. When I lived in New York City I was out on the streets all night long, including going to after hours clubs in Harlem and the South Bronx. Never did I feel the need to be armed.

 

[Roadrunner]

Do we really NEED guns?

Yes and No - depends upon the time and the situation.

Does our NEED for guns matter?

No.

The right of all Citizens to bear arms is guaranteed in the US Constitution.

This right is non-negotiable.

Is there anything else?

Better to have a gun, and not need it, than to need a gun, and don't have it!