QUOTE
Why would anyone in their right mind be put off with people defending their place of business with assault rifles? I mean if they did that then it would be a safer place to shop.
Here's why. This is what I would say if the store I was in had just been robbed:
"Hey, I just got back from the store and the place got robbed. It was kind of worrying til the criminals left. I think the police caught up to them about an hour ago."
And this is what I'd say if I was in a store where the employees and criminals got into a massive fire fight:
"Grgh... Hurk.... Blurble..." That's the sound of me wheezing out my last dying breaths because I'm full of bullets from an automatic weapon wielded by a nineteen year old convenience store clerk with no idea how to operate it, and also some bullets from another kid who couldnt tell the difference between me and the clerk thanks to the panties over his head.
QUOTE
I thought to add anti abortionist bombings and KKK terror bombings but I thought those 3 examples would suffice.
The point is every time a bomb is detonated its big news and the purpetrator is almost always caught. If bombs were legal for self defense there would be more suspects, more incidents, investigations would take longer, and fewer culprits would be caught as a result.
QUOTE
People don't use explosives so often because weapons are more accurate and easier to use. You cant do a drive by shooting or rob a persons property with explosives.
No. People dont use explosives often because they're hard to get. Grenades are ideal to toss out while driving and anyone who wants to rob a bank can strap tnt to themselves and threaten to detonate if not given the cash. But this is very difficult due to the lack of availability.
QUOTE
So have a maximum of 15 rounds per clip is the same as having a maximum of 30 rounds per clip? Do you think... that a pistol round can penetrate walls/debris just as effectively as a rifle round?
This isn't Halo here. You can drop someone with one round either from an assault rifle or from a pistol. And it isnt a Flood ship whose walls you'd be shooting through, it's your own home filled with family and posessions. A lengthy fire fight using automatic weapons is not something you want.
And shooting through walls? Great idea.
-Footsteps from the hallway-
Sleeping Husband: Hmmm? What's that noise? IT'S AN ASSAILANT! OPEN FIRE THROUGH THE WALL WITH NO CHANCE OF VISUAL CONFIRMATION OF THE TARGET!
-Body drops to the floor-
Bleeding Wife: God damn it Ernest! Every time I get up for a glass of water this happens!
Ask any gun owner and they'll tell you that the difference between who is dead and who is the victor has nothing to do with the size or fire rate of the gun, but of the skill and training of the combatants. The gun is just a tool, so its features are largely inconsequential. If you see a guy breaking into your home and you can fire off a round accurately before he does, it doesn't matter if he's carrying a butter knife or a bazooka, you still killed him.
QUOTE
The scenario requires the criminal to have an assault rifle, a submachine gun or a shotgun because regardless which they have they would still have an edge in close range over a person who carries a pistol or rifle.
Youre turning this into some sort of combat situation, working under the assumption that the goal of the criminal is to kill the occupants of the house. This is incorrect. Half the time if a criminal even sees an unarmed person they're going to get the hell out of there. Most criminals don't break into a house expecting world war 3. They indeed try to seek out unoccupied houses. And if I meant to snatch stuff from a house with no one in it, why would I bring a cumbersome assault rifle?
QUOTE
I didn't realise that an assault rifle required a full auto feature for it to be classified as an assault rifle.
I said that this solution is a cop out, and I stand by that. And if it still looks the same, that just causes even more problems for the police force to try to guess whether an assault rifle is a legal type or an illegal type.
QUOTE
I knew that the minimum-wage emplyees were carrying or had at the ready assault rifles should some shit go down
You really have a way of evoking the horror of the situation. Angsty underpaid high school kids with assault rifles is not my idea of a good consumer experience. I'd go and ask for my usual bacon cheeseburger hold the mustard, and then a shudder of terror would pass through me as my pimply executioner revealed that, yes, special orders really do upset us.
This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 22 May 2008 - 09:15 PM