Originally Posted by DivineLegion
This is an uninformed argument I hear WAY to much. Military personnel fire their weapons in single shots, its not the number of bullets per trigger pull that is the problem, it's the number of shots a shooter can discharge in a minute. That is where these weapons become extremely lethal. The "scary" accessories you are referencing are not purely aesthetic either. The pistol grip handle reduces recoile allowing a shooter better control over the course of continuous discharge, sights greater accuracy over distance, adjustable stocks for variable environmental manipulation (ie. you can shorten the weapon for tighter confines), and the muzzle of an AR 15 is designed to regulate the heat of the weapon by controlling discharge for continuos firing. Don't even get me started on magazines, that's just obvious. Semiautomatic weapons are a problem no matter their design. When the second amendment was incorporated into the constitution, the term arms was used in reference to muskets. It would take a skilled soldier up to a minute to reload a musket. The writers of the second amendment had no way of conceiving what an "arm" would become, seeing as the idea of individualized semiautomatic weapons came into play 100 years after its ratification. In order to orchestrate a mass murder on the scale of those seen in the United States over the previous decade in the late 1700s, one would have to enlist the services of a small army.
Pistols, hunting rifles and shotguns are all semi automatic. So is it the scary pistol grip and collapsible stock you're worried about?
Tell me who is the 2nd amendment protecting us from?