in which I ramble about guns

[threeplusfire]

I've been thinking about this site for a few days now. They lay out their arguements well, and I tend to agree. I'd like to say something, but I don't know what yet. The site contains a large number of by images both hilarious, chilling and thought provoking.

Comments

[neflhim.livejournal.com]

Ah, I see. Let me know when you purchase the Barrett Model 50. Why ban it? It is even better then an M16.

See, the problem here is people don't know what they are doing. You don't let them own a tank or fighter, and you don't need a military weapon. Again, I don't care about style, I am talking about military hardware, your actual in-service weapons designed for miliraty use (so no Glock/Colt M1911/Baretta comments). The most effective home defense weapon for the average user is the shotgun, not the AR15.

And yes, if the gestapo was to rise from the ashes of Nazi Germany and show up, then they would be armed with military hardware. This then becomes a "watch the watchers" issue. Eventually you have to trust that someone is OK, or you get the kind of paranoia rampant in Eastern Europe in the last 50 years. When the militaty and civilian weapons were the same, then no one knew the difference. That has not been the case since 1945, however, and there is a real seperation now. Yes, to defend against the oft-used 'secret police' or gestapo something better than a .22 match pistol might be nice. But there is a line. Responsibility is not in great supply these days. And I for one loose too much in taxes already. I am not willing to endorse the expense of training people to handle full auto weapons. And the M16 is being phased out. The new military battle rifle will have a built in 20mm grenade launcher (see here (http://www.secretweapon.com/) for more. It is rather...geeky? but accurate). This is not, repeat not, something that belongs in the hands of someone who can't figure out how to vote on a simle ballot.

The main reason to keep military hardware in the military hands is that they are trained to use it, we are not. Simple and direct. Under no reason should rifles, pistols, revolvers, shotguns, etc. be banned. That is in direct opposition to the second amendment. For simple logical reasons, military hardware should be, and must continue to be.

Oh yes, please note I know the difference between "assault weapons" and military weapons. Again, I don't care if it has a clip, looks like death on a bad day, and a pistol grip. So what? Many really good shotguns have pistol grips. Anyway, the difference I am trying to make is the distinction in the second section on weapons with burst or full auto abilities. By the moronic HCI definitions, a .38 revolver is an automatic weapon.