How to answer Piers Morgan's question "why does anyone need to own an assault rifle"

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do I need?

Only food, water and shelter from the elements. I see these as no better the 3 hots and a cot, one gets in prison. Life would barely be worth the living if only the needs are met.
To derive pleasure from life there are many things I want and shooting my AR15 is but one of the pleasures of my life. No I have no need for an assault weapon. I do find target shooting, reloading, and maintaining my rifles a pleasure that I will not be deprived of because another used one to do harm to others. My life should be for my enjoyment, not a prison of minimal needs.
 
skeeter said:
Piers Morgan is always saying we have no right or need to own an assault weapon that was only made to kill people. I would like to ask him the following question. If he planned to rob someone's home what would he rather face, a 6 shot revolver or an assault rifle? I would much rather protect my family with an assault rifle.
Click to expand...

Piers Morgan is a subject of England as were all his relatives going back over centuries. He says these things because he has always been ruled over and his fellow subjects have become accustom to this. As Europeans alike they do not understand our BoRs and so always fall back on needs. So my answer I don't have a need, I have a right in this country just like anyone else has a right not to own an AR 15.
 
My answer

The weapons I have chosen to hunt with and to protect my family with were chosen because they are the best tools for the job at hand. My job might be different than your job and my living circumstances might be different.

An AR is an example of a lightly recoiling weapon that is capable of being adjusted to fit a myriad of shooters and is realitivly easy to place consistent hits on target with.

If you live in a home where a variety of family members may need to use the same weapon to defend the family and the home not many better options come to mind.
 
"why does anyone need to own an assault rifle"
Click to expand...

Cause they are a lot of fun to shoot. Rip off a 30 rounder on a metal target gets my blood up :) and a huge smile forms....

My nieces ask me every time they come out, can we shoot today? I love them sooo much :)

If and I say if cause of where I live, any folks want to come in and wreck havoc, I sure would rather be able to defend myself rather than a call to 911 about my dead family if Iam able to call that is.

Some folks feel all secure in their own skin, someone outta go mug them once, let em know the feeling of not being in control, of not being secure, then and maybe then they will sing a different tune.

I'm not waiting so I go armed and have a gun in the house. I feel for those that dont feel the need to protect themselves and their families. Their family sure doesnt need to suffer cause of no guns in the house...
 
Why does anyone need to own a first aid kit? we have paramedics and EMT's to handle these situations. they're trained professionals, and while I have learned much about first aid, I do not count myself as a professional first aid person.

Do I need a first aid kit? not particularly, I'm thoroughly cautious, and always consider safety before doing anything remotely dangerous. Do I want to have one nearby, just incase I may need it? You bet!
 
assault rifle i am so sick of reading about those horrible assault rifles, WE.., here and now need to stop using that term, i am reasonably certain we here know that "assault rifle" refers to full automatic firing with one squeeze of the trigger and holding it in that position until the magazine is empty !!
Click to expand...

I must disagree with this definition of assault rifle . By this definition the marines are not issued an assault rifle .It's my understanding they are semi auto and three round burst only . Further More I'm told that they are taught not to use the 3 round burst and only fire in semi auto . Sounds to me a marine would have no problem going to war with one of my ARs . Lets stop acting like it's not a military style weapon . They are and it's why we like them .

I might add it's to late . The anti's won that word game war like they win them all . Lets move on and change the debate to answering who needs firearm like that . That debate can be won in a heart beat . As Americans we do have to prove the need to own something . Thats what the debate should be about . It should be about how the guy in Sandy hook stole the guns then shot and killed the owner . No gun control can stop that from happening . We need to change the argument .
 
How to answer Piers Morgan's question "why does anyone need to own an assault rifle"
Click to expand...
"None of your business, you pommie [expletive]. Now get out of my country, before I emulate Jeremy Clarkson."
 
If he's not a citizen, I don't think he should have any say...

He needs to keep his politics to himself.
 
If he's not a citizen, I don't think he should have any say.
Click to expand...
The rights guaranteed by the 1st Amendment apply to anyone on US soil, not just citizens. It's in the Constitution, towards the back.
 
Sure, he can say what he likes, but as far as policy / decision making is concerned, he should have no part of it.
 
Did anyone catch him last night when he said no mass shooter had ever been stopped by a private citizen?

I nearly losted it at the blatant ignorance of that comment.
 
Less than 400 people are killed with all types of rifles each year. Twice that many are beaten to death with just hands a feet. All this uproar over a weapon that has very little impact on the total number of murders. They will want much more control other than just ARs. They will come at us hard this time and the time is right for them to strike while emotions are high. The only winners are criminals and the government if legal citizens are disarmed.
 
The real reason for the second ammendment!

From what I've read into the writings of Adams, Jefferson, etc.. the main purpose of the 2nd ammendment was to protect against TYRRANY, namely in the form of a tyrranical government. Somehow that seems to be the "white elephant" in the room. Protecting our property, life, etc... is implied, but protecting our God given freedom is the real intent!!
 
Since when do we as a society allow other to tell us what we need and what we don't need. That's not our country, that's Iran.
 
I think we should move away from this argument of need. It's not about need, it never was and never will be. Putting yourself in this argument is putting yourself against the ropes from the start. It's about choice. This is what I choose and that is where we need to steer the argument. I don't need to justify to anyone what I choose to own. Why do we feel we need to give people the power to delegate what our needs are by trying to justify them? That is an argument on their terms.

The problem with arguing with stupid people is that you stoop to their level, argue on their terms, and then they beat you with experience.
 
when you are a subject to Kings and Queens for a thousand years what do you know about freedom! and really who cares about his opnion
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top