Quote Originally Posted by Syme View Post
Secondly, it is nonsensical to draw a distinction between "weapons whose prime function is to kill" and weapons whose prime function isn't to kill, and then claim that the former group of weapons are "assault weapons" while the latter group is not.
no

a weapon that's legal to own and operate on a regular basis should be designed to do one of two things

- defend yourself (imo in a humane way, but this is arguable and i'm not going to include it)
- hunt game

weapons that liberals dump in the "assault rifle" category consist of weapons designed for one thing

- military/tactical use

anybody who claims that an "assault rifle" should be used for self defense is kidding themselves. there's no fucking reason, you aren't scarface, you're not going to get run over by a squad of cubans. you don't need a gun capable of mowing down a lot of people in a very short timespan. a handgun is more than capable of defending both your house and your person if used properly.

that being said, i think an outright ban on "assault rifles" is the wrong way of approaching the concern that the liberals have. something along the lines of stricter licensing and tighter control on that particular category would be more than ideal.