Originally Posted by cutthemdown
You need a lot of power to shoot through body armor. Criminals now where body armor so private citizens need the power to penetrate that. Whats next?
A stupid argument if I've ever heard one.
We need guns to fight criminals. Okay well you don't need these guns that can shoot through body armor to be semi-automatic. Well but criminals wear body armor so we need to be able to defeat that. Then make body armor illegal for average citizens. Well but then criminals will be able to shoot me with guns that can't penetrate body armor.
It's the same stupid argument as:
We need guns to fight criminals. Okay but you don't need semi-automatic guns. But then the criminals will only have them. Okay well you don't need X. But then only the criminals will have X. Okay well you don't need Y. But then only the criminals will have Y.
I need to get to work on time, but I don't feel like following the speed limit. Well you don't need to drive 100mph, you could kill someone, no matter how good a driver you are, stay under the limit. BUT THEN ONLY THE CRIMINALS WILL BE ABLE TO DRIVE 100MPH WHAT ABOUT MY RIGHTS THE CONSTITUTION NEVER SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT SPEED LIMITS.
You already stated that you think fully automatic guns, grenades, and tanks shouldn't be available. Yet, you're being charged by this mythical 10 person riot mob (2 or 3 are armed, btw) and you obviously need something to go through body armor, so why stop at an AR? Why not just say I should be able to use anything necessary to stop people? Shouldn't your reaction be to just go for the thing that's most likely going to stop 10 people from taking your ****ty property?
Why not use landmines? Then you don't even need to be home for them to be effective (and considering the vast majority of burglaries and home invasions occur while people are gone, that's much more effective than keeping a gun in the house).