Ah, sorry mods, I just realized that I may have posted this in the wrong forum. My mistake.
This is a discussion on "I however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use..." within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; <rant> Truth be told, in this post I am venting because I find this to be very frustrating . I read this article thinking "oh, ...
Truth be told, in this post I am venting because I find this to be very frustrating .
I read this article thinking "oh, this will be interesting". The author, who is apparently a law enforcement officer who won't identify himself says the following after professing his support of the second amendment.Check out the article here Ask a cop: Why the anonymity? | ksl.comI however do not understand the need to own an assault rifle for private use, with ammunition that will penetrate body armor. I have met exactly zero criminals who have possessed and have been wearing body armor. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but I have to wonder why someone would purchase ammunition or a weapon for that purpose. Do you need an AR-15 with 30-round clips to defend your house? From what? Terrorists? If you live in the country, then you can maybe justify it. But in an urban environment, I say no.
I gotta tell you, I don't' think there is anything that bothers me more than when law enforcement officers use their position of authority or credibility to spew their opinions on firearms laws. Yes, they are indeed entitled to their opinions and I wouldn't take that away from them. But in a public forum where they are looked up to and respected they SHOULD NOT use that position to give there opinions on the laws. Why? They are not lawyers, they are not elected politicians, they are not a member of some higher class that deserves the right to own firearms.
Let me say this, I am very grateful for law enforcement officers and for the job they do. I support them 100%. But I do not like it when the ignorance of some concerning the second amendment or state and federal firearms laws hurts gun owners.
I could him the same thing "Why do you need 30 rounds, who are you defending yourself against? A terrorist?" Maybe he could tell me how many terrorists Utah Law Enforcement officers have had to shoot in the past century. He mention's armor piercing rounds as to imply that its wrong that civilians should own such ammunition. He needs to pull his head out and realize that his soft Kevlar body armor isn't going to protect anyone from a even the most basic center fire rifle rounds. He decides to demonize an AR because it has 30 of those little rounds that can punch right through soft Kevlar.
I'd be willing to bet this guy carries either an AR or 12 gauge with slugs in his patrol car that will both work wonders against soft body armor. Why does he insist that he have a monopoly of force?
Thanks for listening
Last edited by HotGuns; February 4th, 2012 at 06:03 AM. Reason: language workaround
Ah, sorry mods, I just realized that I may have posted this in the wrong forum. My mistake.
The whole defeat body armor argument is interesting. IIRC most rifle calibers will penetrate the soft stuff. So unless you have plates, any rifle could potentially defeat it. So what's next, ban rifle caliber firearms? It's the old, "I support the 2a but...." argument. I wonder if he's read about any of the home invasions around the border. Aren't they starting to wear armor and dress like cops? Are all of those in the country?
I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!
"Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"
The problem comes from folks that actually believe that citizens must show a valid reason for doing something. That those in power should decide on whether the need is real. Just look at how many restrictions are justified by the logic that a person doesn't need something.
I live in Hollywood... In the past six months I have had a guy soot at ppl on sunset blvd cuz his girl friend broke up with him, an arson lit something like 60 fires on sleeping ppls apts and cars, and two women walking their dogs found a DUDES HEAD!!!! In the hills above my apt... And to get a ccw license I have to demonstrate a need??? And to really rub salt in the wound that is Cali's gun laws, all that stuff happening with in a mile of my home DOESN'T demonstrate a need... This is why I don't have my ccw yet... :-(
I grew up thinking that American was great because ALL citizens where given equal rights... But now I learn that I order to be given those rights I must prove a need for them???
I'm starting to ramble... Feel free to pick up where I left off...
Last edited by 1shooter; February 4th, 2012 at 03:29 AM. Reason: Spelling error
I saw (camera video) on the news, four men committing a home invasion. All were armed and they kicked the door in and rushed into the house. They were repelled by a senior citizen with a shotgun, but he was lucky they were incompetent home invaders and gunfighters. I was thinking to myself, how would you defend yourself against that type of attack?
"20-30 round ASSAULT RIFLE" is the only logical answer.
What chaps my ass is most LEO's are not Gun Guys and have no Idea what they are talking about and spew out utter BS,but to somebody that doesn't know anything about guns they believe them because Cops carry guns and they would never lie.
I'd rather have 30 rounds and only need one or two,than have one or two rounds and need 30.Back when I carried the M16A1 we only had 20 round mags and there was only one company AFAIK that made mags it was COLT.in the late 70's they started making and fielding 30 rounders due to the fact the newer mag pouches were designed for them,I had the Canvas 20 round pouches.In all reality I prefer to shoot prone with 20 round mags,and in reality I wouldn't feel under gunned if my HD carbine had 20 round mags,but I would have 2 clipped together.
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
--Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
However I'm no combat instructor... So take what I say with a grain of salt.
But yes lots of ammo is a must. U can't be caught with your pants down.
"I've noticed that everyone that is pro-abortion has already been born." - Ronald Reagan
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson
You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.
Most people that spew that stuff out have never really thought about the subject in any depth.
In the absence of understanding a subject, it is common place to repeat what one has heard or read about it from the news media...which is often wrong.
It's standard procedure for people that are ignorant of a particular subject and they aren't hard to spot.
Universal Background Checks...the next step towards registration and confiscation.
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
I read the entire column, and I seriously doubt the authenticity of the writer. The language, nuances and terminology just don't add up to an actual LEO.
Having been a cop for 30 years, I want every citizen to have access to what the media loves to term assault rifles, but what we all really know are just semi-autos that look like a battle rifle in substance, but are not. They do not have the mechanism or barrel to operate as or to even withstand fully auto fire. I also know that fully auto fire is one of the chief reasons soldier accuracy fell for years. Aimed fire is better than pray and spray any day.
Can you say L.A. Riots? Can you spell New Orleans? Watts Riots? How about a listing of all the riots since the 17th century if you want to read that many.....List of riots - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That said, when the angry rampaging throngs rush your home's door, or car, or office building or whatever, and there are no cops around, you suddenly discover a hand gun, or a single shot pistol or even revolver, or pump action or bolt action rifle or shotgun can become a life and death issue really fast.
And armor piercing ammo???? Ninja Please! A .22 cal squirrel rifle will pass right through my Level III vest without really slowing down.
The lie that armor piercing ammo is needed to penetrate a police officer's street level vest needs to be buried once and for all. Any rifle will penetrate a kevlar vest without up-armoring. Look at the vests SWAT officers wear or Raid Team Entry Vests and see how thick they are. No street cop can wear that for 8 hours and be able to perform their duties as needed.
The terms Assault Rifle and Armor Piercing "Cop Killer" bullets are smoke and mirrors used by the Antis to fool people who are too stupid or scared to actually think or read up on the truth about weapons and ammunition, both what they can and cannot do, and the reality of self defense, which the same people seem to think is someone else's job to provide for provide them.
A good read for anyone that wants to see what happens in disasters inside and even outside the "Disaster Zone" is provided by this article, which I have recommended to my own children and extended family. Senor Frog has a pretty good bead on things:
Thoughts On Disasters
Fortune Favors the Bold!
So, going under the auspices of "well maybe if you lived in the country",
How about drinking and driving?
Maybe in the country because it takes longer to get to where I'm going, and there aren't as many people, so if somebody ends up having a wreck, it couldn't be too bad right?
How about not having to wear seatbelts in the country?
Not as much traffic, so it should be ok right?
I could go on all day with crap like that, but,,,,,,,,,,,
The guy is an IDIOT, with a very simplistic, narrow minded view on life in general, it seems.
I would rather die with good men than hide with cowards
If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."
M&Pc .357SIG, 2340Sigpro .357SIG