Why Do You Need That AK-47?
Posted: Monday, April 06, 2009
by Michael Ramzy
delusionthread.com
Gun control sounds almost like an oxymoron. It's almost up there with 'uncontrollable violence', come to think about it. Regardless, this is probably one of the most divisive issues facing us today. And yet, as with most subjects that divide a people, there apparently is no 'debate'. You are either for it or against it. It is that simple.
This past week we have heard and seen two separate incidents in which two men went on a spree and killed. One decided to kill over a dozen individuals who wanted a better life in America. The other decided to ambush and kill three police officers. In both cases the men broke no laws until they pulled the trigger(s). In other words, the guns were obtained (or could be obtained) legally.
Those who want stricter gun control (there's that oxymoron again) want to ban assault rifles, automatic weapons and the like. Gun owners and advocates say that would be unconstitutional and the first step toward getting all of the guns away from law-abiding citizens.
For the record, I personally do not like guns. Never had, probably never will. I wasn't raised with them, which is probably why. I do not allow them in my house, and I have never been in a situation where I have thought to myself, ' boy, if I only had my gun right about now'.
That said, I believe every American has the right to possess guns. It's in the Bill of Rights, it's a tradition, and I truly believe for many people it is a comfort to have that gun in the closet or under the bed for peace of mind against burglary.
This is what many Americans believe, I think, and I also think this is where that 'divide' happens, and where the 'debate' fails. Regular guns aren't enough, many gun-owners say. 'We need more firepower. We need automatic weapons that rend flesh and scorch the earth'.
Why? What purpose can having an AK-47 or automatic machine gun have other than going on a rampage? You wouldn't go hunting with one, would you? You wouldn't shoot that burglar with one, would you? I mean, seriously, what possible reason could anyone have for owning a gun such as that? Are you arming yourself for when the government comes and takes everything you own? They already own everything you have, remember? Are you going to have a mini-revolt as they did during our Revolution? If that is the case, it's going to take a lot more than what you can buy at a gun show or through the mail. A lot more. This isn't the eighteenth century when the 'enemy' comes at you with muskets, remember?
And yet, there are those who justify these guns by saying if these guns are taken from us, the next step is rifles, then handguns. Well, all I can say is by that logic you should all have bazookas and bombs made of C4 (like on television) and suitcase nukes. But you can't buy that stuff legally because of the possible damage to the general populace.
So it should be wih these assault weapons.
Those who want to ban all guns have to rethink their argument. Those who want any and every kind of gun have to rethink their motives. Guns are part of our national heritage. They are an integral part of individualism for many Americans. But please do not tell me assault weapons are necessary for an individual to protect himself, and please do not tell me you need an AK-47 "just in case".
This Article has been viewed 2,620 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsHi Michael.I will comment first and then read the other comments.I tend to agree with those who say that banning any firearms for personal possession will only make it easier to ban all firearms for personal possession.I also strongly believe that anyone who wishes to harm others will find a way to do that firearms or no firearms.As for those who think that "regular" firearms are not enough, I do think there are other issues at play; perhaps low self-esteem. In my book, a handgun (whether it's a revolver or semi-automatic) is sufficient for personal protection. Still, I stand by my initial statement.We rely on the maturity and morality of American adults to make wise decisions about not talking on cell phones while driving, about not going after someone with a gas powered chain saw, about a whole host of dangerously lethal things. And we rely on that same maturity and morality to keep people from using guns (albeit one of the easiest ways) to kill other people.But for those who are inclined to do murder, any weapon will do be it a "regular" handgun or an AK-47, a screwdriver or a hammer. Okay, so the automatic can take out more people in less time than can a revolver or semi-automatic handgun, but there is no greater significance in greater numbers of dead. Just one person dying of violence is too many.This is how I see it. We own guns and we use them responsibly. I would not want anyone to take away my right to own the handguns that we have. I don't feel that they make me safe. In reality, nothing can do that. But it is my right to protect myself should the need arise and this is how I prefer to do it as, most likely, anyone coming into our home and threatening me will have a gun themselves and getting close enough to use a hammer or a baseball bat just wouldn't be an option.Dianne
Nope, I do not 'need' an AK-47. But your point (albeit well-made) seems to disregard that fact that whether or not I need one has no bearing whatsoever on my right to have one. Our country was founded upon certain principles, one of which was the right to keep and bear arms. The US Supreme Court has recently ruled in favor of a personal right to those arms.To argue that people may die because we allow gun ownership is a great argument. Great, that is, in its effect; not so great in terms of the facts. It serves a purpose: to scare people into thinking that- of course- certain types of guns should, must, be outlawed. That argument neglects to inform how many people may die due to gun control, if enacted.I don't need an AK-47. Very often, I don't 'need' my freedom of speech. There are many constitutional rights that I don't need on a daily basis. That doesn't mean that they should be thrown out.
The basis of your argument is flawed by that one word: need.That's a very good point. I perhaps should have used the word 'want'. Thanks for reading and commenting.
Michael- A lot of people don't identify themselves because they are concerned about their own government in what they do and don't do for Americans. Yes and weaponsa re something Americans are concerned about as the 2nd admendment allows. Just last night we considered buying a weapon. A 89 year old living alone raped and beaten and left for dead. Another in her driveway attacked. A young girl living alone had prowlers just the other day adn we have always had a good decent neighborhood. No longer. We do not know who is up the block and police. You only see them on main streets giving tckets out. We are going to get a civilian police like it or not it is coming and people here in America, Americans do most sit still they act. Now what everyone continues to gloss over is the fact that crimials can get any type of gun they want, when they want. Secodly all guns are designed to kill, period. Now we are being indoictrinated by the gun control crowd. Every incident highlighted, played and replayed and yes I agree there are lot more wacko's out there and criminals. We have multiple millions walking our streets and we and our governement don't know who they are and more coming every day. Do you not recognize what is happenig in Mexico? Can it happen here? Your darn right. Someone wants those drugs and uses those drugs and can afford those drugs and someone who is struggling, starving out of work well you fill in the blanks. So people are arming themselves. That is good decent people. Why, first they expect our governenment to do the reverse of what they say they will do, fact. Second this economy for the little guy isn't getting better no matter what they market to the masses and finally our culture, morals and values have changed. Now throw in that a good number of our military is made up of non citizens and growing and that raises questions. Don;lt want to hear, consider, well it is all about, that is if one cares to look.I understand where you're coming from. I also understand many people feel the need in this day and age to arm themselves against any (perceived or actual) threats. I just don't get the big gun thing. As I said in the article, it must be my upbringing without guns.Thanks so much for reading and commenting.
Like Ken M., I got lost in all the blather! I think assault rifles (or whatever you want to call them) should only be legal for military and police use. If an intruder comes into my home with an AK-whatever, I figure it's all over with anyway. However, I do believe in the public's right to bear arms for self-defense. Our neighbors just had an almost break-in just a couple of months ago. The guy used his driver's license to try and unlock the door. The license broke with the part with his name on it falling inside the house. He commenced to kick the door in to get his license when the owner came down the stairs with a gun. The intruder ran away--leaving his license. Needless to say how that ended. I, myself, have had a concealed weapons licience for many years and will continue to keep and carry my 40 cal. Browning wherever it is legal. I have trained to use it, I have been forced to use a gun on an intruder only once (didn't kill him; but I did stop him), and would do it again if necessary and it didn't take an AK-rifle to do it. Oh, and by the way, I was pregnant with my daughter at the time of the break-in---and she too is alive, well, and a 35-year-old mother. Nuff said.Sandra
Sorry, Michael, I didn't mean 'blather' from your article, I meant from some of the anonomous comments. The article was great. You are a gifted and talented writer---didn't want any confusion in my feelings about that.Great job.SandraThanks. I understand about the 'blather' from some (not all) of the respondents. I think they read a different article, actually. Thanks for reading and commenting.
jesus people....what the hell will it take for you to understand that fully automatic AK-47's are ILLEGAL!!! you CANNOT buy one or OWN one. It is a felony if you do or try to convert one to fully automatic. Any owner of an AK-47 in this country has a SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapon, not a military assault rifle (unless they have one illegally).the ONLY way you can get a fully automatic AK-47 is if you get a special permit from the government and then be willing to shell out $10,000.And yes, i own an AK-47 myself.
The answer to your question is simple. The primary purpose of the second amendment is to ensure that the people are protected from a tyrannical government. To that end, they need to be able to own appropriate tools for that job.Wow, this article wasn't about the second amendment or the right to bear arms. I appreciate that debate as I am all for the second amendment, as the article says. I was just wondering why someone needed a gun such as the example. Thanks for chiming in, though.
To bad you would problibly think a semi-automatic Ak-74 was an assult rifle. You would also think my stainless synthetic .22 rifle with a 30 round mag is a assult weapon. If you agree with this post you are uneducated. Aks are used for protection because of their stopping power. What purpose can having an AK-47 or automatic machine gun have other than going on a rampage? Just because it is a AK-47 doesnt mean its fully automatic, and also a ak-47 is classified as a assult RIFLE. You are insulting every american taking use of their gun right by saying there is no other reason to have one beside going on a rampage. You are insulting america as a whole like it or move to north korea where you would problibly fit in with all the radicals. Thx for schooled by a kid in 10th grade.
You mentioned automatic machine guns many times and those have been outlawed since 1983 if I remember correctly, the only legal ak47 machine guns that are legal are in excess of 6- 10k and you have to get a 200 dollar permit the atf
Why do i need an AK47 (semi auto only which is legal to own in some state). It's my weapon of choice. Reason why i own an AK type rifle :7.62x39 round suitable for hunting, fun gun to shoot at the range, cheap $$$ Bullet. Rugged .Reason why our government want to ban these so call "assult weapon" they are afraid of them. I own both hunting rifle and military style. If anything goes wrong im taking the AK. end of story i point out my views.
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.