Buy a truck... get an AK-47 (well a civilian version)

[john & jean 37]

disregard the millions who have died to preserve these freedoms?

Disregard the millions who have died to gun violence?

yes,

weapons do not kill they are an inanimate object.

[john & jean 37]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

I don't think we need to strip away the right to keep and bear arms. Just recognize the danger guns pose to everyone's safety.

Who said strip away, actual case is restrict away.

Irrational fear of the government might be a good starting point for restricting gun ownership.

the founding fathers woulda loved you.

The founding fathers had single shot, black powder weapons...

And once again, if you don't ####### over the concept of free Chinese assault weapons you are clearly against the Constitution in the view of VJ gun nuts?

I am not anti-gun ownership. Just against wrong headed proliferation when it shows its ugly head. Get it straight.

Guns are the weapon of choice for murder in this country... That is a legitimate concern.

single shot black powder is a red herring - it was the average firearm used on the battlefield. and while you're using the term assault rifle, know that

1- assault rifle is generally a term used for firearms used by a national army

2 - it's capable of selective fire, not just semi-auto

3 - assault rifle is a term used quite frequently by an idiotic media that has no clue about firearms. it just sounds better for the news than a "semi-auto rifle"

4 - i prefer american made

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

[john & jean 37]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

Yes Charles!, that is the one that WE took

Edited July 26, 2009 by john & jean

[ready4ONE 5,400]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester which has been used in hunting rifles since the 50's.

Edited July 26, 2009 by lancer1655

[john & jean 37]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester.

the 7.62 is actually less deadly because of nato specifications. however, I do not remember any size specifications in THE SECOND AMENDMENT. THE EFFECT OF THE TWO AMMUNITIONS MENTIONED ABOVE, IS EQUAL TO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NIGHT AND DAY!

[ready4ONE 5,400]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester.

Pretty much any caliber makes a mess. Not sure how that makes guns less potentially dangerous though?

[natty bumppo 297]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester which has been used in hunting rifles since the 50's.

heck ... it's not even up to snuff with the 30-30 (a 110+ yr old cartridge design)

30-30

150 gr FN bullet, 2,390 ft/s, 1,903 ft-lbf

7.62x39

154 gr Spitzer bullet, 2,104 ft/s, 1,519 ft-lbs

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester.

Pretty much any caliber makes a mess. Not sure how that makes guns less potentially dangerous though?

Then we are back to why a lecture between a civilian and military ak 47 is necessary. The civilian model is very limited in its potential because of its magazine capacity and its action. It is basically a mean looking but less accurate standard semi automatic rifle.

Edited July 26, 2009 by lancer1655

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

FYI, I took an oath to protect the constitutional rights that you are willing to give away!!!!!

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

The two of you read much more into my comments than is actually there.

The effect of being hit by a 7.62 mm round, fired from a civilian or military version of an AK 47 on a human being is not sufficiently different to warrant a lecture on the differences between the two. Nor is the victim any less harmed.

The above paragraph is not in an effort to give away constitutional rights.

Legal weapons, in the hands of responsible gun owners can be stolen, or sold down the road to those who would commit crimes with them. They can also be turned on the owners who got them for protection. Guns are thus dangerous on any number of levels. If you are comfortable with the risks, more power too you!

Whats so special about a 7.62mm round? Like I said before its not much different in size then a .308 winchester which has been used in hunting rifles since the 50's.

a fatwah on you for pointing out such an obvious fact!

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Charles and Lancer, I propose an experiment!

We can blindfold and put you in sound suppressing headphones.

I will then shoot you in one leg with a civilian AK 47. Next I will shoot the other leg with a military AK 47.

If you can tell me which wound was inflicted by which gun, without being prompted by the one of you not shot in this first experiment, then I will agree there is some sort of logical difference between the two versions of the same weapon.

We can repeat the experiment on the other of you. This time we can use either version of the AK 47 on one leg, and a .308 on the other. It is possible, despite the pain, there will be a noticeable difference in the wounds, but my guess is, with the level of potentially lethal trauma to each leg, you won't really be in a mood to guess which gun inflicted which wound.

[NickD 203]

The founding fathers had single shot, black powder weapons...

And once again, if you don't ####### over the concept of free Chinese assault weapons you are clearly against the Constitution in the view of VJ gun nuts?

I am not anti-gun ownership. Just against wrong headed proliferation when it shows its ugly head. Get it straight.

Guns are the weapon of choice for murder in this country... That is a legitimate concern.

Again I refer to the 2nd amendment in the bill of rights.

"Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Really don't see anything mentioned about single shot black powder weapons or any other technology.

For a definition of arms: arm2 (ärm) n. 1. A weapon, especially a firearm: troops bearing arms; ICBMs, bombs, and other nuclear arms.

Guess I really wouldn't want to have a nuclear ICBM in my personal collection, maintenance cost is way too high, and I know by using it, would also be killing my family and myself in some indirect fashion. But this is also an arm as defined by the second amendment.

Also a little soft on the 2nd amendment, really do not object to a person to lose this right if they use an arm to murder someone in cold blood.

[john & jean 37]

Charles and Lancer, I propose an experiment!

We can blindfold and put you in sound suppressing headphones.

I will then shoot you in one leg with a civilian AK 47. Next I will shoot the other leg with a military AK 47.

If you can tell me which wound was inflicted by which gun, without being prompted by the one of you not shot in this first experiment, then I will agree there is some sort of logical difference between the two versions of the same weapon.

We can repeat the experiment on the other of you. This time we can use either version of the AK 47 on one leg, and a .308 on the other. It is possible, despite the pain, there will be a noticeable difference in the wounds, but my guess is, with the level of potentially lethal trauma to each leg, you won't really be in a mood to guess which gun inflicted which wound.

you have issues. no doubt, people like you should not own weapons You also obviously know very little about lethality of either weapon....