 |
| This is an AR-15. A semi-automatic rifle currently set for hunting or long distance plinking. |
So I figured with the furor over guns still going on I might as well stop avoiding the inevitable and inflict my opinion on the world. Or at least the seven of you who happen to come across this whilst seeking far better entertainment.
So. Guns. I should mention before we begin that I will hereafter refer to "high-capacity magazines" as magazines that hold more than a standard amount. (Standard amount being the amount that the manufacturer uses. For example, a standard mag for a Colt 1911 is 8. Meanwhile, a standard mag for an Heckler & Koch USP .45 is 12. And a Glock 17 in 9mm is 17 rounds.) Also, "Assault weapons" or "Assault rifles" will be called "Assault-style rifle/weapon." Or Carbine. Or rifle. Cause I mean, come on, there's not much you can do besides leave this page if you disagree.
My stance on guns, is the standard Weaver stance. ... Oops, sorry. I mean. I'm against the restriction of firearms. (Oh, I forgot to mention that one too. They'll also be called firearms.) It is true that violence begets violence. That being said, in the case of guns, most of the time it ends the violence as well. If violence does happen, it can stop it in it's tracks. Another point on the side of guns, is that it can prevent violence altogether. There have been times where a person merely reaching for a firearm has stopped a would be criminal in their tracks.
The government has no right to try to take or limit my ability to protect myself, my family, or any others in harms way. I know that they claim that they're not trying to take our guns, but limiting magazine sizes restrict my safety. Who are you to say how many chances I get to try to defend myself? Recently in New York they placed a restriction on the magazine capacity of AR-15's to seven. So what happens if a junkie looking for money for a fix kicks in the door to my apartment. There have been cases where police officers have emptied one magazine and most of another into someone like this in order to stop them. Most officer carry around 50 rounds on their person. In a case like this they just expunged over half of that. Seven is not enough.
Now that does not mean that every gun needs 30 rounds. The Beretta Model 92 has 16 rounds standard, but you can purchase a high-capacity magazine containing 30 rounds. Now is that even practical for personal carry? No. But how about home defense? Sure. You leave that mag at home in your safe. If and when the baddies come a knockin' you can answer with 30 good reasons for them to stay away.
 |
| My Heckler and Koch USP .40 |
My H&K carries 13 rounds per mag. So I carry 2 mags. Carrying plain FMJ rounds this still might not be enough. For you see, FMJ (Full Metal Jacket) is designed as a target load. Being encased in a metal shell, the round would pass through someone doing less damage. Now for you people who say this is more "humane" I'll answer with one word. Wrong. Yep, you read that right. W-R-O-N-G, Wrong. Yes it does less damage, but it passes clean through. (Let's talk physics. Physics physics physics physics physics.) With out stopping (unless you hit bone or are far enough away for it to lose enough velocity) the transfer of energy is often not powerful enough to stop someone. Especially not if they're high or their adrenaline is coursing through them.
Since this is the case I carry Federal Hydra-Shok. These are rounds that are designed to mushroom (expand) causing the bullet to transfer it's energy into the person. (They're also the rounds some law enforcement agencies carry for that exact reason.) Yes it does more damage, but it is more likely to stop a would be assailant in his tracks. These rounds are also designed to stop more, and kill less, which is of use to me. It's my guiding star.
 |
| It should be obvious, but to those bugwits out there, the two with the brass casing are Full Metal Jacket. The other two are Hydra-Shok. |
Now if I were limited to 8 rounds, my ability to defend myself would be greatly lessened. There's a reason I wouldn't carry a 1911 as a sidearm. Owning one is a different matter.
Now to address those who say "Why do you need a... (insert gun, AR-15, "Assault rifle," whatever.) First, who says need has anything to do with it? Who says we need something to be able to own it? Do you need a car? There's public transportation. There are cabs. How about an mp3 player? You don't need it. You can live without one. So we'll throw the word need out the window. Defenestrate that word! How about the "Besides hunting..." argument that Piers Morgan likes to use? Now you're putting limits on my reasons. Besides transportation, why do you need a car? Whatever my reason, don't try to limit my responses by excluding one of the main points.
