What's your stance on the banning of "assault rifles"?

2016-06-14T12:15:06-04:00

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 12:16 PM

2016-06-14T12:16:51-04:00

Standing, in a fighting position.

Response by PO2 Robert Aitchison made Jun 14 at 2016 12:17 PM

2016-06-14T12:17:38-04:00

Trick question, it's already illegal for ordinary civilians to possess assault rifles. ;)

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jun 14 at 2016 12:21 PM

2016-06-14T12:21:54-04:00

A gun, regardless of what flavor it is, is merely a tool. By itself it is an amoral piece of machinery that cannot take action independent of a user. If you want really want a target worthy of blame, you place it on the hand holding it. Only the wielder can decide if the actions of the gun are going to be for good or evil. Personally, I've decided that mine will be used to protect....

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jun 14 at 2016 12:24 PM

2016-06-14T12:24:10-04:00

Here's my stance:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 12:26 PM

2016-06-14T12:26:35-04:00

Let's start by banning the TERM assault rifles.....since everyone everywhere wants to put that label on pretty much anything that fires rounds bigger than a rubber band.

Response by PO3 Sandra Gomke made Jun 14 at 2016 12:29 PM

2016-06-14T12:29:23-04:00

I'm right back to the phrase "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." Any kind of gun ban will not take care of the problem of terrorism.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made Jun 14 at 2016 12:30 PM

2016-06-14T12:30:57-04:00

I am totally and 100% AGAINST the banning of Modern Sporting Rifles. The term "Assault Rifle" specifically refers to a firearm that has the ability to fire on full automatic or burst mode. Derived from the German term "Sturmgewehr" Assault Rifles is a term used by the media to demonize the AR15.
The AR15 is the most modular, easiest to use, easiest to upgrade and easiest to learn to shoot rifle in the world.
The Bottom Line Upfront:
It was an act of terrorism. It was not the fault of the gun any more than the attacks of 9-11 were the fault of the Boeing 737. It was the act of a human being, by his own volition and not the act of a crazed Modern Sporting Rifle.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 12:34 PM

2016-06-14T12:34:50-04:00

It is all nonsense....these people are pushing to ban an assault rifle when the same amount of damage can be done with any kind of weapon given the right motivation and planning. Banning a specific type of weapon will not change anything, these people need to educate themselves on weapons before throwing things like this around.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jun 14 at 2016 12:36 PM

2016-06-14T12:36:50-04:00

If we did come up with an acceptable definition of an assault rifle, then banned it for all non-military use (excluding law enforcement) , what would be the result? check on the FBI statistics for killings as a percentage using assault rifles. Then check out how many killings were done with a legally owned assault rifle? The answers to these questions will give you my take on the subject. I do not own one, although I own a high powered long gun, and a couple of handguns and a shotgun.

Response by SGT David T. made Jun 14 at 2016 1:04 PM

2016-06-14T13:04:50-04:00

Against.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jun 14 at 2016 1:08 PM

2016-06-14T13:08:29-04:00

Here ya go boys, first let's define assault rifle and where the term came from:
http://www.assaultweapon.info/

The Truth About Assault Weapons

This is an AR-15 rifle. It is the most popular rifle sold in the United States today. Millions have been sold to American citizens since 1963.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 2:24 PM

2016-06-14T14:24:46-04:00

Hi, SSgt Freeman.

The term "assault rifle" is a misnomer created by politicians and perpetuated by civilians who don't know better to refer to a class of weapons that aren't what they think they are. Unless you have a Class III NFA Weapons / Title II Firearms license, any mag-fed rifle you buy will be a semi-automatic rifle. One shot per trigger-pull. If you're worried about high-capacity magazines, I can cycle through multiple fifteen round mags just as quickly as the Orlando shooter did through the thirty round mags he had. Banning or regulating that type of gun, whatever they want to call it, would not have stopped Omar.

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Jun 14 at 2016 3:00 PM

2016-06-14T15:00:03-04:00

Guns are bad... mmmkay.

In all seriousness, it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The only justification is if someone wasn't adequately trained in its operation. Otherwise it's the same as anything else. You need to be trained, you pass a background check, and you have adequate funds to purchase one.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 3:09 PM

2016-06-14T15:09:39-04:00

Ban assaults not riflles

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Jun 14 at 2016 3:20 PM

2016-06-14T15:20:14-04:00

Its the person who owns the trigger finger who is to be blamed.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jun 14 at 2016 6:01 PM

2016-06-14T18:01:16-04:00

Bad idea. There is nothing inherently wrong with autoloading rifles. Most of the opposition is driven strictly by their cosmetic appearance.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jun 14 at 2016 6:23 PM

2016-06-14T18:23:45-04:00

My stance is whenever "ban" comes up on anything, it guarantees a big jump in sales. So if you take a look at the numbers of AR's sold during the Obama tenure, then you'd see the liberals have been the best sales boost for these assault "looking" weapons. I know so many that have them just to have them, just in case. Stay tuned for the results of the Orlando Bump.

I recall when there was liberal chatter about restricting ammunition sales, there was a likewise uptick in the sales of reloading equipment and components.

Bottom line, I'd say the conservatives should engage in gun control debate when the liberals can bring themselves to engage in mental health, Radical Islamic Terrorists, rebuilding the family unit (needs to be a father around), etc. stuff. Until then, I expect John Q. Citizen to be left hanging in the wind for some time because neither side will give in.

Response by SPC Darren Koele made Jun 14 at 2016 6:34 PM

2016-06-14T18:34:47-04:00

One stance solidified by facts. The last "assault weapon" ban did nothing to curb so-called gun violence. "Assault rifles" account for less than 1/10% of gun crime. More people are killed by bare hands than "assault rifles". If they ban "assault rifles", what do they intend to do about the other 99.9% of gun homicides?
Anyone catch the latest name? They are now calling them "weapons of war". First of all, they are not weapons of war. Secondly, even they were, when one reads the 2nd amendment and the Declaration of Independence, they would see that "weapons of war" are precisely what we are meant to have.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 6:42 PM

2016-06-14T18:42:25-04:00

I like to think of them more as a counter-assault weapon.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Jun 14 at 2016 6:50 PM

2016-06-14T18:50:33-04:00

I just finished writing a short rant about this subject on FB.

I am so sick and tired of educating people.
NO an AR 15 is not an assault weapon. The AR 15 cannot kill 100 people in seconds with one pull of the trigger. the AR15 fires one bullet each time the trigger is pulled by a PERSON. With 22 years in the US Army I would refuse to go to war if the AR-15 were the weapon being issued to me... So all you anti gun folks that keep telling lies (those that know the truth) or keep spreading the lies (because you didn't know the truth) Now you know the truth so just stop it.
Concentrate instead on why the FBI didn't vent this guy in Orlando and how they are supposed to vent tens if not hundreds of thousands coming from Muslim nations if they can't do one person right....

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 8:02 PM

2016-06-14T20:02:21-04:00

If this question was asked before modern firearms were produced, I would say restrict the F out of them... But that's not the case in todays world. I believe that every state (if voted for) should run BG checks on both state and federal levels for BOTH long rifles and handguns... For example, in 2013 I was able to buy my first AR-15 same day, ran a check with the FBI, walked out. Just recently I purchased my first handgun, and I had to wait two weeks for the state check (didn't have my CPL at the time). I like the 2 week check, it prevents any "ticks" for someone not mentally sane and also allows the feds and state to do their check.

I also am not opposed to a tax increase on ammunition to fund a free firearms safety program that is available to anyone and everyone. This can tackle and help educate those living in poverty and a dangerous neighborhood where they HAVE to protect themselves with firearms. You can argue that gun ownership is expensive already, well it's expensive because WE make it expensive (supply and demand).

Response by SGT Jimmy Carpenter made Jun 14 at 2016 9:17 PM

2016-06-14T21:17:11-04:00

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 14 at 2016 10:00 PM

2016-06-14T22:00:30-04:00

Since assault rifle when used in its proper context is defined as being a "selective fire rifle" with a detachable magazine. There is already a federal assault weapon ban. The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act - a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB).

Response by 1SG Dennis Hicks made Jun 14 at 2016 10:02 PM

2016-06-14T22:02:51-04:00

Just like the hundreds of other feel good laws that have been passed and the other drug (CRACK) induced nightmares that are in the works now. The only folks that it will stop are law abiding citizens. It will further disarm the rest of us while leaving the criminals and govt shock troops armed. One day these idiots will push just a little to far and lose an arm and head.

Response by MSG John Wirts made Jun 14 at 2016 11:37 PM

2016-06-14T23:37:49-04:00

In the first place the term ASSAULT RIFLE is a political term, not a military or firearm termonology, The worst thing to happen to the Second Amendment was the introduction of the AR-15/M-16 platform. The AR was not Automatic Rifle, or Assault Rifle, it was Armolite Rifle for the manufascturer. It was black, scary looking , and the military hype about the M-16 is unending. It is over 50 years old and is dated as a military rifle. That said it is simple, light, and at short range an effective weapon. It is definately not high powered, or good at long range. The modifications to demil the AR-15 are ludicrus take off the flash supressor, does not change anything about the performance of the weapon. Remove the bayonet lug, I have never heard of anyone using an ar-15 in a crime, I have definately not heard of a criminal fixing a bayonet to the end of his AR-15. It's all political smoke and mirrors. The politicians want absolute control over the people, take away their guns and you have absolute cotrol. Call out the militia.

Response by Cpl D L Parker made Jun 15 at 2016 12:41 AM

2016-06-15T00:41:01-04:00

Assault rifles were designed to kill people at a high rate. if it were up to me I'd cross out the 2nd amendment but if forced to keep it I'd lobby for blunderbuss'