Basically on september 13th the assault weapons ban that was put into action is going to sink and once again we will be able to buy all sorts of fun toys to "defend our homes and families." I for one am rather excited if only because there's going to be a glut of fun toys out there for at least a few months. But sadly I'm conflicted inside. Bush being a Republican would try and keep from another assault weapons ban in forming. Kerry on the other hand would of course kick the ban through congress as fast as he possibly can.

I hate bush... But I like my guns. God damnit I'm so conflicted right now

Damnit. I read "a thread for wankels".

hahaha one letter off

"defend our homes and families."

american paranoia a it's best

Hey asshole your vote doesn't count

it's so true, the us government is creating fear among the US citizens to better control/manipulate them.

My SPAS 15 keeps the US government out of my house.

In theory.

Hmmm...my Glock is legal again, if the ban fails.

The assault weapons ban truely misses banning the majority of weapons used in crime, anyway. It bans the appearance of a weapon, more than the functionality.

I like the part about bayonet lugs being illegal. How many police have been bayonetted... EVER.

Is your glock magazing pre ban or post ban? If its a pre ban magainze in a post ban gun its legal as far as I know.

If this is lifted can I get a MP5? Damn that sounds like a lot of fun. If not I'll stick to getting my P229.

Yes you should be able to get a civillian MP5 with a semi auto action. They are some of the best guns I have ever EVER fired.

the worst thing about it is that they don't care or sometimes almost seem to like it!

why don't we need a gun in canada? :o

Wait... Wouldn't giving them guns provide them with a sense of security??

Hey its your fault for not wanting them.

WAIT how many people have voted on this poll and don't even live in the US?

Face the facts ... you dont need a weapon with a firing range of 400 yards to protect your homes and families .... they may sound a lot of fun but thats only till one lunatic gets his hands on it.

I didn't vote, I don't need a gun, my e-penis is large enough to slap the intruders.

Although I have my firearms licence and I can legally possess shotguns, rifles and certain types of handguns, I have never owned one.

The only way I will buy one is if I decide to take up hunting as a hobby.

I can't wait for the Mortar/RPG ban to get lifted.

I'll get a head rush every time I whip out my E-Penis.

There is no need for people to have assult rifles. It just makes it that much harder for cops to do their job. Renew it.

I don't like guns...part of me wants to see them banned outright.

But I value them as being something to be used by a free society.

I think it's not unreasonable to ban assault weapons though...but guns for hunting/pleasure (aka target shooting) should never ever ever ever be banned or overly regulated.

But guns that are designed with the killing of other people as their top priority? What's to be gained from having them but bloodshed? You're not gonna hunt deer with an M16, or take it to the shooting range, so it's useless in a civilized society.

So, yes on banning assault weapons, no on banning guns.

Wow, that made all too much sense. I couldn't have said it better.

Pansies!

Nothing is as fun as an afternoon with a AR-15, half a dozen 30-round mags and some pumpkins.

Its actually pre-ban. Its legal because it was grandfathered in. I never really use that clip, unless I'm at the range, and want to make a lot of noise. In a self-protection situation, I'm good enough that I wouldn't even need the standard 7 shot clip. Of course, shooting 21 straight out of a +2 is a whole lot of fun, and after you popped off shot 14, other people in the shooting range start noticing.

What do you mean ? They're great for pinging off squirrels.

Yeah honestly there is no other weapon more fun than an assault rifle on a range. I don't hunt, never will hunt, but I feel I have a right to assault rifles. And since the ban has been enacted has anyone noticed the crime rate go down?

We have very strict gun control laws in Canada. But do you think that a criminal who will be using a gun to commit a crime will be using a legally registered gun ?

Overly restrictive gun control laws only cause a lot of grief for responsible, law abiding gun owners. There should be some restictions of course, but our controls in Canada are way too strict.

Paulie I think you have the most sane mind about guns over any canadian I have ever known.

i like living in Australia, no guns for sale at the corner shop ,
I know some people who have them but they have hunting licences. My mates gonna take to the firing range and give me a few goes at firing some pistols

I am a for right to carry, and I am for extremely harsh punishment for gun related crimes. Much of the things that our government seeks to ban in these things are off-base, and the majority of them only know what lobbyists and their underlings tell them. Its much like the hype in banning DVD and CD recording devices, and services that distribute music / movies. The lawmakers only care about what makes them look good, and where the campaign funds come from. In effect they ban features that are the most useful, and in a lot of cases are not the defining features of weapons used in crimes.

Here is a perfect illustration of why this assauly weapons ban is rediculous, and needs to be dropped. Its basically ineffective.

Says who



Actually, I think the only reason anyone would buy an AR is Just to own it. Just like all of the other worthless stuff we buy just for the fun of it.

To quote a Japenesse general on his reluctance to INVADE America during WW2..
"Because there is a gun behind every blade of grass". That should say something about how American is portrayed... Because we have the freedom of guns then no one is gonna want to mess with us. I mean seriously would you rather invade a country that after you take out all the military and police you still have to worry about the populas(sp) having guns ?. or would you rather take out the military, police and have all the guns in the land.

As an American citizen I have the right to keep and bear arms. And you can never have enough Assault weapons.

As a Texan I definatly embrace my right to have a shotgun hanging in my back windshield of my truck. (I just need to get me a truck first lol).


How true that is !.

Replace "AR" with Carrera GT or any other uber desirable car.
Who has a problem with that??

TexanBeretta, in this day and age, perceptions will not save us, and the world is a smarter place...America is no longer "the place that has lots of guns." Guns won't protect us from biological weapons or carbombs or hijacked planes; if you think they will protect us in this day and age, you're stupid.

I agree we have the right to have them, but I think it's a mistake to put so much emphasis on their utility...they are, in effect, toys. Deadly toys, but toys nonetheless.

Cars kill more people than guns do.

But cars are much more useful than guns...

Maybe a metro is more useful. You don't need a fast car at all. You need a car for utility.

A Ferrari Enzo is more useful than an AK74, dakian. Doesn't even have to be a practical car! An Enzo will get you from point A to point B much faster than a gun!

But the enzo isn't used for A to B its used for fun. If you make the arguement that cars are more useful what about to hunters? Most people only drive cars because they have to and a few extremists have even gone so far as to rely on public transportation *shudder*. Cars are just as much of a luxury as guns and are just as dangerous so if we're allowed to have fast cars that are capable of breaking the law why not have powerful guns that are capable of it as well?

That is a good argument, but the thing is that cars are designed for transportation...many cars offer fun transportation, but the point is that a car is designed to get from here to there. Some cars are designed to get from here to there on twisty roads!

Guns are designed to kill. Many guns are designed to kill animals, so they can be eaten, or harvested in some other way. Those are not the guns that are being debated here. The guns that are being debated are the ones that are designed to kill people.

When you kill a person with a car, you are using the car incorrectly. When you kill a person with an assault weapon, you are using it correctly. And that's the difference.

Says who?

I do think its ironic though when car's tops speeds are advertised. Especially in england. 140 mph! Ok why don't I just GIVE them my licence and save them the trouble of banning me.

Well, uh....that's for track use. Yeah.

But seriously, you can go 200 MPH in a car on the road and not kill (or seriously injure) anybody, although you would be breaking the law massively. That would be using a car to its full potential on the road. Anybody hurt? No. Law broken? Yes.

Using a gun to its full potential means SHOOTING SOMEBODY! Anybody hurt? Yes! Probably dead! Law broken? Hell yes, and rightfully so.

And I think at this point I'm really just arguing why I don't like guns, which is beside the point.

This is a free country and, to not be hypocritical about previous statements I've made about the US becoming too socialist for its own good, people should be able to buy whatever weapon they want and use it, and then be punished for whatever illegal actions they may undertake after the fact.

However, for those 2nd Amendment nuts out there, do not forget it says "to keep and bear arms in a well regulated militia"...to me, a well-regulated militia means that the government, or some other sort of authority, has deemed a person safe and legal, and has given them a license to own a certain type of weapon, which they can then use.

Well said :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

i say nay to the renewal simply because you can get around it so easily anyway, but it doesnt really matter to me.

Mostly because i just want a pistol, although being able to get magazines not restricted to 10 rounds for a decent price would be very cool.