Adjam5 Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 It's for this reason that I'm all for a training requirement in order to own an automatic tactical rifle. Can't agree with you there Bug. The Gov't does such a great job at other things. They would probobly do a great job with that too...NOT. Your theory is just because of a few bad gun handlers, all gun handlers must have their rights restricted? That is gun control period. With over 300,000,000 guns in circulation. A extremely small percentage are used criminally. One of the reasons the 94 assault weapons ban expired was the sunset clause in that bill. Congress left in the bill that the 94 ban was to be revisited and explored when it was due to expire. They did and found that 1/10 of 1% of those type weapons were used in crimes. So the ban was abolished. Keep that in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerClay Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 Can't agree with you there Bug. The Gov't does such a great job at other things. They would probobly do a great job with that too...NOT. Your theory is just because of a few bad gun handlers, all gun handlers must have their rights restricted? That is gun control period. With over 300,000,000 guns in circulation. A extremely small percentage are used criminally. One of the reasons the 94 assault weapons ban expired was the sunset clause in that bill. Congress left in the bill that the 94 ban was to be revisited and explored when it was due to expire. They did and found that 1/10 of 1% of those type weapons were used in crimes. So the ban was abolished. Keep that in mind. Lets not also forget that the Libs have seen how we got some guns like the bushmaster around the 1994 ban. You can bet they will not make that mistake again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bug House Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 I agree with the above sentiments, and you're essentially preaching to the choir.... but I'm noticing a trend. That trend is that automatic tactical rifles have become somewhat of a fasion statement... and that's dangerous. VThunter makes a great point, yes his service should qualify him for ownership. I don't have the answer either, but if I had to take a 6 or 8 hour class with some range time in order to own an AR, I wouldn't have an issue with that. Mind you I'm not suggesting a ban, just education. I'm also aware of the Feds immaculate track record when it comes to bureaucracy....ultimately it should be left up to State Govt. Just like a million other things that the Feds want to micromanage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 I agree with the above sentiments, and you're essentially preaching to the choir.... but I'm noticing a trend. That trend is that automatic tactical rifles have become somewhat of a fasion statement... and that's dangerous. VThunter makes a great point, yes his service should qualify him for ownership. I don't have the answer either, but if I had to take a 6 or 8 hour class with some range time in order to own an AR, I wouldn't have an issue with that. Mind you I'm not suggesting a ban, just education. I'm also aware of the Feds immaculate track record when it comes to bureaucracy....ultimately it should be left up to State Govt. Just like a million other things that the Feds want to micromanage. The firearms used in recent mass shooting were not automatic! Automatic firearms require class 3 license. People should learn the difference in auto and semi auto before they make misinformed comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.