Assault Rifles/Right to Bear Arms

And the actual action of shooting. Have you ever fired a gun? Even at an animal. I've been shooting before, and i can tell you that the first time you even fire the damned thing you are shaking to hell. Let alone the first time you shoot at something living
Let alone the first time you shoot at something big (like a deer or a cow)
klet alone a human

P.S. Who the hell shoots cows?!

You shoot a cow in 1 of 4 situations.
1. It has a contagious disease like Mad Cow
2. It is lame or seriously injured.
3. It is old and in pain.
4. It is no longer worth anything and it is not worth it to keep feeding it.

As some of you might know, tonight at midnight our ban on the sale and purchase of automatic assault rifles expires. The house of Representatives has declared that they will not try to renew the ban. This is because they fear what the NRA will say about them on election day. 70% of Americans want the ban reissued. So the discussion is, do you think the ban should be allowed to expire? Is the "right to bear arms" outdated?

Fix problems with gun control by giving everyone a gun?

I don't really see a need for assault weapons, though the gangsters can get them easily.
I believe that the people should have the right to bear arms in the form of rifles hand guns etc.
Whether people think gun toting is "outdated" is inconsequential. It's an amendment to our constitution. The constitution can not be ignored....it's law. Guns could be banned with a constitutional amendment, but that would take years, even decades and probably wouldn't pass anyway.

thousands of american kids are killed by guns every year..and you seem to put your right to bear arms above that?

in the UK anyone reported to have been seen with a gun with no good reason is normally surrounded by a very well trained armed response unit in about 20-30mins. Hell, even a friend of mine, whilst in year 7 (11yrs) brought out two police cars and a helicopter when some old woman reported him with what in fact was a realistic looking wooden gun his dad made him. we seem to trust that our police forces will treat the matter seriously and act quickly whilst the attitudes of some in america seem to suggest that they dont trust their police forces and everyone around them

If people are allowed to bear arms then where does this right end - are peope allowed to not only have pistols and rifles but to also have tanks and can you also justify not allowing someone their own nuclear weapon (after all something that kills is something that kills - no matter how many it has the potential to kill).

A law to ammend the constitution could be passed in a week if it was needed.

One of the key differences is that if you have a gun now you are an armed criminal. Actually possessing th gun makes you a criminal. Liekwise with replicas (which can be made lethal so are equally dangerous).
Hence whereas before the sight of a gun would have the police round, now it will have fully armed cops ready to take you down.

I don't think the average person could afford a tank or nuclear weapon. And, the difference is that a tank or nuke is not applicable in singular self-defense, unless an army is attacking you, which is unlikely.

thousands of american kids are killed by guns every year..and you seem to put your right to bear arms above that?

No it couldn't. It takes rather longer than a week to ammend the constitution. It's actually a rather complex process don't you know?

I don't think the average person could afford a tank or nuclear weapon. And, the difference is that a tank or nuke is not applicable in singular self-defense, unless an army is attacking you, which is unlikely.

I don't think the average person could afford a tank or nuclear weapon. And, the difference is that a tank or nuke is not applicable in singular self-defense, unless an army is attacking you, which is unlikely.