[QUOTE="LikeHaterade"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Just because an assault rifle can be used for self-defense, collecting, or for "fun" doesn't mean that the right to own them cannot be infringed. Guns aren't the only form of weapon that is regulated. What about all the knifes that are illegal in America? Illegal knifes can be used for self-defense, fishing, and collecting, but they are more hazardous to the general population than an average knife would be. The same way an assault rifle is more hazardous to the general population than a hunting rifle or a hand gun might be.
-Sun_Tzu-
No sir. A hand gun, in many ways, be more dangerous than an assault rifle simply for reasons of concealment or easy handling. They both have the same outcome. What would make this wrong would be to go and take away assault rifles from many people that don't use them to kill people that have invested thousands of dollars into a hobby for the reasons that I provided.
You're right; they both have the same outcome. I believe in the saying that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." It is regrettably an undeniable fact.
But with that being said, an assault weapon has the ability to produce a much higher number of casualties than any hand gun could. Because that is what an assault weapon is made to do, kill. You can speculate that because a hand gun is more dangerous, because it can be concealed or that it is easier to use; but that's all it is, speculation. There are concrete facts that suggests that an assault rifle is more deadly to a general population than a hand gun. The only way to argue that a hand gun is more dangerous is through the use of speculation and assumptions.
That and assault rifles account for less then 1% of all gun related attacks!!!!! There is no speculation in that. There are no assumptions in that, that is a fact. Handguns are way more deadly then assault rifles, despite the potential for an assault rifle to be used as a more effective killing weapon.
Log in to comment