- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 31,057
- Reaction score
- 3,969
- Location
- not here
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
So you believe guns that are committed in minuscule amounts of crimes should be entirely banned? Also, what do you consider military style assault weapons as well as high capacity magazines. These terms are very ambiguous and vary from state to state. If your objective is to fight crime would you prefer to ban handguns? These are more likely to be involved in a crime.
Hand guns are very rarely used in mass killings of the kind we've see of late, and handguns as a weapon for home protections has been covered in the Heller decision. So no, I would not ban them. Crimes that we are referring to with respect to assault weapons are those that com under this defintion:
Assault Weapons | Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Assault weapons are a class of semi-automatic firearms that are designed to kill humans quickly and efficiently. As the diagram below shows, the military features that clearly distinguish assault weapons from standard sporting firearms enable shooters to spray large amounts of ammunition quickly while retaining control of the weapons.
These include the military versions as seen below:
High capacity magazines would be those of over 120 rounds.
The object is the weapon designed for modern military use. Crimes will be committed by people with knives, so getting the "massacre weapon" weapon out of the criminal element and keeping it away from the deranged , as in Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, cartel gangs operating in the US, and terrorists originating in the US is the means to an effective end of safer streets.
For the purposes of THIS debate, you have now moved the subject from what "would you do", to "assault weapons". That is two subjects.