Sorry, while not as long-winded as you, I form my own ideas.  But you are right about one thing, I don't know you very well.  Nor do I care to.    Just asking for merit when the government decides to expand it's authority. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2013 8:00:00 PM (view original):
#1.   My wife has never fired a gun.   If someone breaks in and I'm not around, I want her to be capable of firing as many shots as possible.
#4.   If the situation reaches the point where I need to fire, I'm not real concerned with collateral damage.

If I were a sport/target shooter, I'm sure I'd like to see how I could group a hundred rounds in 30 seconds.  Sounds like fun.

I'll also add that I don't know why anyone would really need an AW out in the wild but, if they felt more comfortable with it strapped to their back, I'm not going to say "No, you don't need that."

I don't think you're being honest with those answers. Have you ever fired a .223? They're not ideal in home defense situations. Shotguns and handguns are better. And if you needed to carry a gun around everyday for protection, you certainly wouldn't want a rifle.

I'm comfortable saying you don't need that. We already say you don't need that when it comes to other illegal weapons.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2013 6:40:00 PM (view original):
Which is fine.   But there's no logical reason for it.   Didn't I just list a bunch of mass shootings that didn't involve a HCAW?

Assault rifles only make up 1.7 percent of all guns in America. Their only purpose is to kill people and they are impractical for self defense. What do we lose by getting rid of them?

You say they are impractical for self defense. I disagree. If I have 50 bad guys coming across my front yard the first thing sticking out the window will be a HCAW.

50 bad guys? Ok, I want a HCAW when I get attacked by zombies.

If you want to allow people to defend themselves you must allow them to have weapons that are equal to what can be used against them. Otherwise I'll take the HCAW against your .22 single shot bolt action rifle anyday. Are you up to it?

Honestly, what are you, 12?  This isn't some Western movie where a whole band of outlaws is going to come storming your settlement.  50 bad guys?  Are you serious?  Both the number and the fact that you refer to them as "bad guys" are hilarious.  Maybe if you're in a gang your rival gang will come after you with a bunch of guys, but outside of that virtually noone is ever attacked in there home by more than 3 or 4 guys, and in that case they're usually looking to rob you, not hurt you.  And frankly, I'm not going to buy any argument based on the idea that we need to allow HCAW to protect America's gangs from one another.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:54:00 PM (view original):
50 bad guys? Ok, I want a HCAW when I get attacked by zombies.

Ok, bad guys and zombies aside, I want a HCAW to defend myself when 50 government agents show up to take my guns away. It ain't gonna happen! And I won't be the only one who won't allow it to happen.

I'm glad you can predict the future based on the past. Please send me one of your crystal balls so I know only 3 or 4 guys will be the most I ever have to fight off in a confrontation.

Posted by bheid408 on 1/22/2013 10:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:54:00 PM (view original):
50 bad guys? Ok, I want a HCAW when I get attacked by zombies.

Ok, bad guys and zombies aside, I want a HCAW to defend myself when 50 government agents show up to take my guns away. It ain't gonna happen! And I won't be the only one who won't allow it to happen.

Lot of blowhard idiots like you.  I guarantee you if government agents come and ask for your guns you're not going to start shooting at them.  Even if it's 1 or 2.  You all talk a big talk, but you won't do it.  And frankly, the morons who say they're going to rebel if the government "comes for their guns" are the very people I want nowhere near assault weapons.  Anyone who is going to make that statement is clearly not rational/intelligent enough to be trusted with a weapon like that.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2013 8:00:00 PM (view original):
#1.   My wife has never fired a gun.   If someone breaks in and I'm not around, I want her to be capable of firing as many shots as possible.
#4.   If the situation reaches the point where I need to fire, I'm not real concerned with collateral damage.

If I were a sport/target shooter, I'm sure I'd like to see how I could group a hundred rounds in 30 seconds.  Sounds like fun.

I'll also add that I don't know why anyone would really need an AW out in the wild but, if they felt more comfortable with it strapped to their back, I'm not going to say "No, you don't need that."

I don't think you're being honest with those answers. Have you ever fired a .223? They're not ideal in home defense situations. Shotguns and handguns are better. And if you needed to carry a gun around everyday for protection, you certainly wouldn't want a rifle.

1. If your wife has never fired a gun and you are worried about her why haven't you trained her how to shoot? If she has never fired a gun the shotgun is probably the better bet anyway. Assuming she knows how to load. And turn off the safety.

2. Please don't be at the mall or school I'm at when things go bad then. I'll take my chances with one...not plus someone who is not concerned with collateral damage.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2013 8:00:00 PM (view original):
#1.   My wife has never fired a gun.   If someone breaks in and I'm not around, I want her to be capable of firing as many shots as possible.
#4.   If the situation reaches the point where I need to fire, I'm not real concerned with collateral damage.

If I were a sport/target shooter, I'm sure I'd like to see how I could group a hundred rounds in 30 seconds.  Sounds like fun.

I'll also add that I don't know why anyone would really need an AW out in the wild but, if they felt more comfortable with it strapped to their back, I'm not going to say "No, you don't need that."

I don't think you're being honest with those answers. Have you ever fired a .223? They're not ideal in home defense situations. Shotguns and handguns are better. And if you needed to carry a gun around everyday for protection, you certainly wouldn't want a rifle.

I'm pretty sure firing off 50 rounds in 20 seconds is pretty good home defense.   Even if you don't hit anything, the bad guy can hear.    And no one wants to hear that coming from the dark. 

Posted by seamar_116 on 1/23/2013 4:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2013 8:00:00 PM (view original):
#1.   My wife has never fired a gun.   If someone breaks in and I'm not around, I want her to be capable of firing as many shots as possible.
#4.   If the situation reaches the point where I need to fire, I'm not real concerned with collateral damage.

If I were a sport/target shooter, I'm sure I'd like to see how I could group a hundred rounds in 30 seconds.  Sounds like fun.

I'll also add that I don't know why anyone would really need an AW out in the wild but, if they felt more comfortable with it strapped to their back, I'm not going to say "No, you don't need that."

I don't think you're being honest with those answers. Have you ever fired a .223? They're not ideal in home defense situations. Shotguns and handguns are better. And if you needed to carry a gun around everyday for protection, you certainly wouldn't want a rifle.

1. If your wife has never fired a gun and you are worried about her why haven't you trained her how to shoot? If she has never fired a gun the shotgun is probably the better bet anyway. Assuming she knows how to load. And turn off the safety.

2. Please don't be at the mall or school I'm at when things go bad then. I'll take my chances with one...not plus someone who is not concerned with collateral damage.

1.  She has no interest.   But that probably changes if a stranger enters the house.   My guns are loaded and she does know how to check the safety.
2,  Perhaps you should make sure you're not in a mall or school with me when things go bad.   Your safety is not my problem.

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/23/2013 12:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bheid408 on 1/22/2013 10:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 1/22/2013 9:54:00 PM (view original):
50 bad guys? Ok, I want a HCAW when I get attacked by zombies.

Ok, bad guys and zombies aside, I want a HCAW to defend myself when 50 government agents show up to take my guns away. It ain't gonna happen! And I won't be the only one who won't allow it to happen.

Lot of blowhard idiots like you.  I guarantee you if government agents come and ask for your guns you're not going to start shooting at them.  Even if it's 1 or 2.  You all talk a big talk, but you won't do it.  And frankly, the morons who say they're going to rebel if the government "comes for their guns" are the very people I want nowhere near assault weapons.  Anyone who is going to make that statement is clearly not rational/intelligent enough to be trusted with a weapon like that.

I can tell you are a very intelligent person because you try to belittle other people with insults. Once you feel superior you can even predict how other people will act.
If you think public gun owners won't form their own militia and rebel if the government tries to take away their guns then you aren't as smart as you think you are. And most of us morons already have HCAW so you're SOL there.