Yeah, I was figuring you meant a full auto AK or other full auto rifle. Your point is still valid though. :nod:

You should only be allowed to own the gun if its barrel is filled in and you only can throw the rounds at people.

what if you had a .50 cal blow gun?

With poison darts???????

Guns are tools, each designed with a specific job in mind. To say otherwise is incredibly ignorant.

What, exactly makes one gun "more dangerous" than another? And while we're on the subject... WTF is an assault rifle? Assault is an action. A gun is an inanimate object. If you're referring to an AR or AK-type variant, they make fantastic home defense weapons. Most high-speed small diameter rifle ammo will fragment upon impact, stopping an assailant in his tracks, and minimizing the chance of injury to any bystanders.

WTF!? Ban a particular caliber and style of bullet? I'd imagine you are referring to hollow-point type ammunition, which has the LOWEST chance of collateral damage, and is the BEST choice for self defense. And caliber restrictions??? The fact that you even bring this up as an option shows how ignorant you are. I'd love to know what you think any caliber restriction will accomplish.

Yes sir:lol:

Specific? Kill would be specific I guess.


I wouldnt call the AK a small diameter round, AK round is pretty big.
5.62 round is a bit smaller, and doesn't fragment as much as it just can be tossed around easier inside the body, reducing the bullet blowing through the body. As far as stopping power...AK has much better chance at stopping someone due to caliper, but also has a greater chance the bullet going through the body.



Now you are putting words into my mouth. Hollow points are good for home defense, bad when they are used by the wrong people. Hollow point is designed to be a killer round, and when that round finds its way into the hands of the wrong people, bad things happen. The hollow point round does limit collateral damage, yes, but if the round is fired accidentally, or at the wrong person, you are looking at a world of hurt for that person, possibly an innocent bystander. There is no safe bullet, there is no safe gun.

You can go back and forth on this, and its why this is such a heated topic. How do you decide who is a good American that can enjoy the 2nd amendment right, and who do you say cant? How do you limit certain guns to reach the hands of bad people?
Limiting guns that have fully automatic capability, large capacity magazines, larger caliber rounds, etc etc are there to stop the flow of these types of guns to the general public.
Yes, criminals can get these types of guns, but that is not a great point for average Americans to have them. Average Americans are not law enforcement or military.

but when the law enforcement or military isn't sleeping with us in our bedroom when someone breaks into our house unlawfully, our 2nd amendment tool is their to protect us.

Right, but who would be slinging around an M60 or AK for home defense? I would guess that the best home defense weapon is one that requires the least amount of aiming and delivers the most amount of stopping power at a reasonable distance. I think a pistol gripped semi auto 12 gauge would be all you'd ever need. Like a Benelli M1 or even a SPAS 12. "It's for protection" only goes so far in my opinion.

So you need a 100 round drum slung under an AK-47 to protect your house?
j0n talks about stopping power, and I would say a 1911 .45 ACP round will do way more at stopping people from harming you then a fully automatic machine gun would.

12 guage straight to the face. I would take a nice shotgun over an ak for cqb

Maryland's carry permit process is as restrictive as NJ's, average law-abiding citizen can not get one.

So while any *** with a drivers license can buy a gun, only police and a very tiny few others can be armed in public.

Compare violent crime statistics from either NJ or MD to any state with non-discretionary issuance of carry permits if you're ready for an awakening.

SPAS-12 is a no-no here in NJ. Felony crime just for possessing it.

I am aware of this. I think there are issues with pistol grip shotguns anyway, correct? However I can see the value in making those OK for home defense. It's full auto stuff for home use I don't get. Seems like there are much better options.

That shotgun gives me a stiffie.

Side note. I want one really ****ing bad. Yes, it's a heavily used hollywood wonder gun like the Desert Eagle. I STILL want one.

I spent 8 years in the Army under oath to support and defend the Constitution...for a flock of sheep to give away their rights and mine along with them??

Who said the 2nd Amendment has anything to do with protecting your house?

So, you would protect that same constitution if the 2nd was repealed?
Not that I want that, I just wanted to see the reaction.

There are probably twice as many gun-related contests as there are car-related contests. They don't count then I suppose? Do you also have a problem with my desire to hunt deer and pheasant? Would you rather bambi destroys the front end of your turd gen? How about hunting bear? I need a pretty beefy round to take down a bear.

And this is why you should never, EVER, have anything to do with firearm laws and this state, country, or any municipality. An AK-type variant typically fires a 7.62x39, 5.45x39, or 7.62x54r round. Guess what? Two out of three of those are 1.5 times SMALLER in diameter than the .45acp you recommend yourself! Also, all 3 have way more stopping power, and guess what... at close range, THEY FRAGMENT! The "5.62" you refer to, is I suppose 5.56x45, is larger than the 5.45x39 fired out of a LARGE cross-section of ak-type rifles yet you allude to it being smaller, and it TOO has shown that in typical inside-the-home distances it will fragment. Use frangible ammo, and there is less than a 1% chance of collateral damage.

Remember the Hollywood shootout? How many cops and civilians were killed and wounded as a result of the bad guys having more powerful weapons than the cops? The instant that tragedy ended, police departments everywhere began equipping themselves with semi-automatic rifles to give them a fighting chance. The mere possibility that some "omfg scary hollow-point" bullet could make its way into the hands of a criminal makes it THAT MUCH MORE IMPORTANT that I have the ability to arm myself with the same firepower. On a similar note, if you fire a FMJ bullet accidentally, not only the person in the line of fire will be injured, but so will the person behind him, and behind him, etc etc.

Anyone who is not a criminal is entitled to EVERYTHING listed on the Bill of Rights, without restriction. The second I commit a crime I lose those rights, but while I am a law-abiding citizen of the United States of America, the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the right to own and carry any gun I choose to have.


How many legally purchased fully-automatic weapons find their way into the hands of criminals? Any idea? Do you know how much they freaking cost, and how hard it is to get them? I'd wager my salary that less than .01% of legally purchased fully-automatic weapons in the United States ever made their way into the hands of criminal, let alone were used in a crime. Yet, illegally purchased guns continue to find their way into the hands of criminals. That reason alone is a FANTASTIC POINT for me to have them too.

Exactly, and when seconds matter, the Police and Military are minutes, even hours away.

You're right Billy. That would be an excellent home-defense weapon, but in the state of NJ it would be illegal.

100-round drum would be fun for the range, and would be the only thing I would use it for. A 30-round magazine is what the AK and AR platforms were designed for, and would be my choice should I ever need to defend myself with one, however, it is illegal for me to own one in this ridiculous state.

Thats the argument being made here, that having guns is a personal protection thing.

Thank you for your service. Just remember that even in this godforsaken lib-tard infested state there are still those of us who do not take freedoms for granted.

Amen. This discussion really is quite pointless, as the 2nd Amendment protects my right to own any firearm I want, regardless of reason.

If that ever came to be, we would have a 2nd Civil War, and you can guess whose side I'd be fighting for.

A 2nd amendment repeal would leave a lot of Americans extremely vulnerable.

They are making the argument for personal protection but it's also just not their home they'd be protecting.

...and if it happened, which I don't think it ever would, we as Americans would deserve everything we got if we let it happen.