Reasoning for private ownership of assualt guns

[MNMGoneShooting]

Hi all -

I'm not by any means new to firearms and I'm all about 2A; so don't be mislead by the title.

I have a reason to have my handguns and shotguns in my home and on my person; defense of the home and defense for myself.

Other than "They are cool" or "they are fun" (and they are! I remember from my military days...), what is the reasoning behind purchasing an assault weapon?

The only thing I can think of to tell the wife if I ever wanted to get one is "what if we get invaded?" While that is always a possibility, is it realistic to believe my ownership of an assualt rifle would be part of a solution?

I can see this has the potential to be a large debate (hold back, Kruetz!) - I hope it stays simple and cordial.

My question comes from curiousity and to be educated.
Might as well add the cool icon ----->

[joeshmo]

no such thing as a assualt gun Exactly what are you trying to say here? Is there no reason to own semi auto's or are you trying to justify owning one?

[Chingon]

No such thing as assault guns. All firearms are nothing more than tools. When employed properly, they can be used for hunting, home defense, or target practice. Some fire faster than others while others are designed for accuracy. I' ve never heard of an assault shovel or an assault ax.

[001]

Whoa! What about zombies.. I say the suburban with the mini gun out the roof

What if a crowd of disgruntled gang members try to drive by the house

What if the neighbor you made mad cause his wife is at your house.. His gun may be bigger

What about the angry weird guy 3 houses down with giant glasses who always get caught peeping around the ladies bedroom windows

What if your dog accidentally eats the raw steak on the table and goes mad.. Sucks but

What if your wife is beating you Don't shoot her.. She will win in court.. Take the beating and say you fell lol

Ok Ok.. Im having fun lol
I believe in the cool factor ( OH YEAH! ) What other reason would you need
Although I did describe it as this... Even if you may never need it..

3 things of a man's life you don't play with:
1- Horse, 2- Sword, 3- The Lady
These 3 in present day are this :
1-Truck, 2- Gun of Choice, 3- Krista Allen ( damn she is hot ) lol
The gun is like a man's sword, it is unique and it reflects themselves.. ( So mini gun is ultra cool )
That was my reason..

[meak99]

Assault weapon is nothing more than a term made up by the Gubmint to segregate "scary looking" guns into a separate category for the purposes of setting extra "sensible gun laws" and even banning. If you're talking about machine guns, full-auto, then I think you're right. The NEED for a machine gun is far less, in my opinion, than the NEED for a handgun, shotgun, or rifle fr most people - whether semi-auto or not. If we're "invaded", a machine gun will only be good to those who know how to shoot them correctly, else I think it would just be a big waste of ammo. The other reason is definitely the cool factor. I've never shot full-auto, but I'd love to. Wasting $10 in ammo (.223 anyways) in about 6-8 seconds is a bummer though.

[Chingon]

^^^^

[jdonovan]

If you're talking about machine guns, full-auto, then I think you're right. The NEED for a machine gun is far less, in my opinion, than the NEED for a handgun, shotgun, or rifle fr most people - whether semi-auto or not. If we're "invaded", a machine gun will only be good to those who know how to shoot them correctly, else I think it would just be a big waste of ammo.

Has nothing to do with NEED and everything about RIGHT to own.

[MNMGoneShooting]

Has nothing to do with NEED and everything about RIGHT to own.

I figured this would come up - and that was my first thought: "Because I can!"
I don't know if I would ever want to justify a purchase; it would be cool to play with. I just wondered if I was missing a bigger picture. Beyond civil war or invasion, I couldn't figure out how it would be utilized in today's current neighborhood terrains.

Sorry if my terminology was offensive.

[meak99]

Why own something simply because you have the right to? For me, there has to be some need/rationale for purchasing other than the fact that I have the right to....

[MNMGoneShooting]

Why own something simply because you have the RIGHT to?

I thought about that a lot, and agree with your question.

I understand the risks of allowing rights to fade away because they are unused, but I don't want to buy an airplane simply because I'm able to. It would be detrimental to my finances if I pounced on everything I have a right to have; hence, my question.

[CCFan]

One thing no one has really mentioned - the AR 15 platform lends itself to easily changing out an upper and shooting different calibers, very handy... I purchased one simply because its a joy to shoot. No other reason than I wanted one. Same as I wanted this revolver or this semi auto pistol or this bolt action rifle.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Palladin]

Why own something simply because you have the right to? For me, there has to be some need/rationale for purchasing other than the fact that I have the right to....

Duty. I know it probably seems archaic, but that's the way I see it.

If all you can afford is a rusty old single shot, so be it. If you can afford to own a minigun and deploy it, then have at it. It all comes down to responsibility and self-governance. If you aren't responsible enough to govern yourself, some one will do if for you... it's just a matter of time.

[meak99]

Why own something simply because you have the right to? For me, there has to be some need/rationale for purchasing other than the fact that I have the right to....

Duty. I know it probably seems archaic, but that's the way I see it.

If all you can afford is a rusty old single shot, so be it. If you can afford to own a minigun and deploy it, then have at it. It all comes down to responsibility and self-governance. If you aren't responsible enough to govern yourself, some one will do if for you... it's just a matter of time.

I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly. Are you saying that I have a duty to buy the biggest, coolest, most powerful, most expensive gun I can afford and responsibly own and deploy? I hope I am wrong in my interpretation of your statement.

[sigster]

My opinion on this is... Guns are like cars, I can get to my destination in a chevette, or I can get there in a jacked up F-350 super duty with 17-40 monster mudders. Either way, I get there.
Handgun, shotgun, rifle, all perform the same duty in the hands of a law abiding citizen.
They may look different but they all only do one thing, shoot boolits

[jdonovan]

Sorry if my terminology was offensive.

No offense taken.

[dorminWS]

Why own something simply because you have the right to? For me, there has to be some need/rationale for purchasing other than the fact that I have the right to....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

No offense, but that just does not compute.

I've done a lot of things because I WANTED TO and COULD (had a right to) that someone (even me, sometimes) probably thought I didn't NEED to do. (We won't go into whether I SHOULD have done some of them )

THINK about the foregoing statement. There's a lot more meat on it than just a joke.

In fact, one might well argue that NEED is really just a consensus of opinion about whether it is a good idea to WANT something; and query whether you can NEED something and not WANT it. Point here is that what someone else thinks you need is a dangerous thing to allow to always limit whether you can have what you want. It's about personal liberty and autonomy.

[WRW]

Why own something simply because you have the right to? For me, there has to be some need/rationale for purchasing other than the fact that I have the right to....

Might as well ask, "Why bowl or golf? The same exercise is available doing something productive, like gardening." or ask, "Why garden, food is available at comparable prices at the store?" etc.

I have no need at the present for an "assault" weapon, but I sure as hell want that right should the need arise.

[meak99]

Dormin - No offense taken. You state you've done things because you "WANTED TO and COULD", key word there is "and". Have you ever done anything you didn't WANT/NEED to do but COULD? In your scenario, you still did the activity because you wanted to.

WRW - I bowl or golf because I want to and can afford it. I don't bowl or golf simply because I have the right to do so. I hunt because I want to, even though I can afford meat at the grocery store, not because I have the right to. I am glad I have the right to do these things, but I don't do them simply because I have that right.

Back to the OP's question -

"Other than "They are cool" or "they are fun" (and they are! I remember from my military days...), what is the reasoning behind purchasing an assault weapon?"

To me, "they are cool / they are fun" equates to "because I WANT one, and can afford it". So, other than WANTing one, NEEDing one is the only way I'd buy one. MY need is determined by ME, based on what situations I think I'll be in. OP's question didn't appear to me to be about rights, rather justification.

I guess I do/buy things because I want them, or because I feel like I need (present or future need) to... not just because I can, or have the right to.

jdonovan claimed that it had nothing to do with NEED and everything to do with RIGHT. I claim there still ought to be some need/want (want was excluded in the initial question) before doing/buying something - in addition to having the RIGHT to do/buy it.

[dorminWS]

Dormin - No offense taken. You state you've done things because you "WANTED TO and COULD", key word there is "and". Have you ever done anything you didn't WANT/NEED to do but COULD? In your scenario, you still did the activity because you wanted to.

WRW - I bowl or golf because I want to and can afford it. I don't bowl or golf simply because I have the right to do so. I hunt because I want to, even though I can afford meat at the grocery store, not because I have the right to. I am glad I have the right to do these things, but I don't do them simply because I have that right.

Back to the OP's question -

"Other than "They are cool" or "they are fun" (and they are! I remember from my military days...), what is the reasoning behind purchasing an assault weapon?"

To me, "they are cool / they are fun" equates to "because I WANT one, and can afford it". So, other than WANTing one, NEEDing one is the only way I'd buy one. MY need is determined by ME, based on what situations I think I'll be in. OP's question didn't appear to me to be about rights, rather justification.

I guess I do/buy things because I want them, or because I feel like I need (present or future need) to... not just because I can, or have the right to.

jdonovan claimed that it had nothing to do with NEED and everything to do with RIGHT. I claim there still ought to be some need/want (want was excluded in the initial question) before doing/buying something - in addition to having the RIGHT to do/buy it.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I don't disagree with what you've said as long as you are willing to limit that to yourself.

Matter of fact, I never owned an AR-type weapon for years because I didn't want one. I own three now, because I decided I did want them, so even grouchy old curmudgeons can change their minds about what they want. And that's a good lesson about "slippery slopes" - I got the first one because the .50 Beowulf was an AR plarform - then I just kept sliding down that slope.

I think the central notion here is it's OK for you to say YOU won't acquire something you WANT unless you NEED it. You and every other citizen of this screwed-up-but-still-great-country have the freedom to do that. What would NOT be OK would be to go down the road that the anti-guners do; which is to take the position that I can't have what I WANT because YOU think I don't NEED it. The dangerous question is, "where does that slippery slope begin?"

Let me hasten to add that I don't think you were saying that "I shouldn't have one because you don't want one". I was just trying to draw the distinction between the exercise of individual choice and governmental interference with it. It usually begins with the prohibition of something nobody much wants/needs anyway or the requirement of something everybody wants/needs anyway. From there bitter experience has taught us it slowly crawls into more and more facets of what has been our private business and individual choice.

<< doing my best to jump off the soapbox without falling and busting my @ss now >>

[meak99]

I don't disagree with what you've said as long as you are willing to limit that to yourself.

Absolutely, why would I force or limit you to do anything based on what I want or need?

I think the central notion here is it's OK for you to say YOU won't acquire something you WANT unless you NEED it.

That's not quite what I'm saying. I'm saying I will only acquire something if I want OR need it, not just because I have the right to acquire it, as someone had claimed earlier.

Let me hasten to add that I don't think you were saying that "I shouldn't have one because you don't want one".

This goes with part one - I would never insist that you, or anyone else, can't have something because I don't want or need it, despite you having the right to have it whether you want or need it at all.