Even if you're pro-guns, why on earth are automatic rifles available in America?

As long as the safe is in the bedroom, you can do it without alerting the intruder, and the fact that you have challenged an armed intruder, rather than just let them take your TV, doesn't lead to a firefight that results in the deaths of your children .

Automatic rifles are not available for sale you liar

Why do lie to further your agenda?

I don't have children and don't routinely go around aiming guns in their general direction. No-one said anything about an intruder being armed, but yes - while that would obviously made the situation far, far more dangerous, I'd probably rather have a gun than not in it.

Ultimately I'd rather not have someone break into my home - and even if they did, I'd rather not have to point a gun at them, but I can undoubtedly see why in some circumstances it would be valuable.



Not in the least - feel free to read on to what I said after the section you've quoted for the reasons behind that. I've pointed out I'm largely frustrated with the inability of many people who post in these sort of threads to make a remotely balanced argument - it seems to either be gun-totin' types who want to turn Britain into the United States, or people who seem to think that guns don't serve any purpose and make spurious arguments that they should all be banned. I'm in the middle, and feel rather isolated by this sort of silly rhetoric.



It's happening pretty well in the UK. We don't generally licence guns for personal protection in Great Britain at least - in Northern Ireland it's rather different, and that's fair enough. However if you were to ask me if someone was in my home, would I rather have a gun stored in my wardrobe than not then the answer would be a very resounding yes.

If I was to own a gun (and I've never done so myself - as I've said, I grew up in the countryside and they were a fairly common feature in my life) then would I make sure I knew how to use it safely and take every precaution against accidents that I could? Of course, and I think everyone who has one should. Unfortunately they often don't.

Semi-automatics are legal in the UK if they are shotguns (rifles technically legal under section 5). I'd rather be shot by an AR-15 than a Saiga-12 any day. Anyone with a shotgun license can pick up a used Saiga-12 for about £600.

See how evil a Saiga-12 looks:

Totally fallacious. Can't tell if troll or not...

The difference is an incredibly smaller amount of people in the UK own guns, never mind this type.

Yes they are. The AR-15 for instance is an automatic rifle as the firearm automatically cycles rounds between trigger pulls. It is not fully-automatic however.

Semi-automatics are legal in the UK if they are shotguns (rifles technically legal under section 5). I'd rather be shot by an AR-15 than a Saiga-12 any day. Anyone with a shotgun license can pick up a used Saiga-12 for about £600.

See how evil a Saiga-12 looks:

Also, getting a license in the UK is a lot harder than in the US. Probably why we have less people getting shot.

I was thinking the same thing. It honestly astonishes me how anyone and their mother can get a gun over there and so many have permits to carry them around. Something should've been done so many years ago.

It's also illegal to shoot people but that doesn't seem to stop them

Nowhere in the Penal Code of any state or the federal code does it say it is illegal to shoot people.
There are a myriad of situations where it is perfectly legal to shoot someone. While these situations differ from state to state , basically if your in fear for your life and can't escape the situation you can shoot. If you see someone being battered to the point where your in fear for their life and your not physically able to stop it you can shoot.
In all situations you can't use excessive force. If your 6'2'' and weigh 220lbs. and your assailant is a drunk 70 yr. old hitting you with a cane you should leave your gun in your pocket.
An individuals self defense is his or her own responsibility. Everyday in America people successfully use firearms to defend themselves and their families.

The difference is an incredibly smaller amount of people in the UK own guns, never mind this type.

Guns are bad, m'kay?

Also, getting a license in the UK is a lot harder than in the US. Probably why we have less people getting shot.

That's not automatic... that's semi-automatic. What your describing is self-loading in a manner that is require for an automatic weapon to be automatic. To be automatic it also requires firing of rounds as long as the trigger is held or pressed.

Yes they're legal.... but to own one of those you need a firearm certificate as it is semi automatic, short barrel length and is capable of holding more than two rounds + the chambered round...

Automatic to mean self-loading is the first and purest definition of the term. It is derived from the first 'automatic pistol' by Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher. A semi-automatic pistol today. Military definitions don't always make the most sense as they are often taken from gunsmiths and engineers and then adjusted for application. Pedantic and purist definitions are fine to use, especially when used tongue-in-cheek - did you catch my cheeky 'automatic rifle' reference?



Again, irrelevant. I never made a point about what specific licenses are required for ownership. Only that semi-automatics are available if they are shotguns.

They should have done what Britain and Australia did. A bunch of kids got shot and the government said "maybe having guns out and about as they are isn't a good idea".

Anyone saying they'd like a gun for protection is flatout bullsh*ting, how about I carry around a knife for protection? Oh, because I'll get 4 years in prison for doing that. And if someone else has a knife, the exact same thing will happen to them. If you want to be protected, then support gun control, if you want to feel like you have a big dick, then don't.

Automatic would only be correct in a pure technical sense of how self loading works (aka it self loads automatically)... if you say you want to ban automatic weapons for example it would only apply to fully automatic weapons. Automatic in military, civilian and market usage only refers to fully automatic weapons (aka automatically fires rounds when the trigger is pulled). If you're talking on a technical forum or concerning arms development you 'could' use the term automatic, but even then term semi-automatic is preferred.

Even Mannlichers first semi-automatic pistol in 1894 was designated and marketed as a "half automatic or semi-automatic pistol". All his later rifles were also designated semi-automatic, simply automatic was never used as far as I can tell.

You stated anyone on a shotgun license (aka certificate) can get one, it's not seeing it's a firearms certificate which is completely different. Even then specific weapons can and will be denied if it's not seen as necessary. It's not how you suggested that anyone with a shotgun or firearm certificate can pick up a semi-automatic shotgun and take it home without any further checks.

of course it would... the number of victims would be far lower.

The bad guys would have their guns taken away if prohibition took place. Then do you jnow how expensive guns would be on the black market? And then do you not realise how difficult it would be to access the black market? Not every mentally ****ed ****nugget could walk into a corner shop and pick up a semi automatic assault rifle and shoot up a school.

As for defence, the only reason one would want a gun is for shits and giggles, bexause they think they're cool. I.e. they arent called "defence rifles" are they?

Posted from TSR Mobile