Nobody in the general public needs a military-style assault weapon for legal gun activities. Period. If there is one person out there who can think of a reasonable use for one of these weapons, come forth. If there is one reason to have assault weapons on the street, come forth. If there is one actual problem with banning them, come forth, because so far, all I have heard is fluff arguments about how that violates the 2nd amendment. Now that that’s out of the way, let us be realistic. Please, please, please let’s be realistic because I cannot take any more circular logic from the opposing side. What are the reasons for owning a gun in this country? Hunting. Target practice/skeet shooting. Collecting antique guns. Other recreational purposes. Again, if I am wrong, please correct me, if you can think of any other viable uses for guns. Now, one by one, let’s go through, and see if any of them require assault weapons. Hunting does not require 10 plus bullets if you want to kill a deer. Target practice does not need an assault weapon. Would anyone want to collect an assault weapon? It’s hardly an antique. It has no historical significance, and isn’t exactly eye candy. For other recreational purposes, you can’t exactly say that assault rifles are “fun.” There will be immovable people out there, saying that the 2nd amendment isn’t about hunting, or about any viable uses for guns. They say it’s about being an equal to your government, and having access to the same weapons they have, so that’s why you should be able to own assault weapons. Actually, the 2nd amendment isn’t about either of those things. Do your research, people! The founding fathers intended it to facilitate a militia, which we have no use for here in the 21st century. You can look this stuff up! Shocking, I know, but here’s your proof, the second amendment states that, “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.” Plus, if we want people to be equals with their government, and have the same weapons as them, we may as well let people buy keys to the nuclear missiles. My point is, we cannot justify any need for assault weapons to be owned by the public. These are weapons that military officials are trained to use, and in the hands of anyone else would just be unsafe. True, banning assault weapons will not stop all mass shootings, but they can reduce the frequency and destructive power of them. Think about how many of the recent shootings were committed using assault weapons. Why? They make massacres effortless. There’s hardly any reloading needed with those high- capacity magazines. The speed at which the bullets are shot is deadly, there is no chance of dodging them. Their power is terrifying, as they are a tool designed for murder. The Aurora theater shooting is a perfect example of this. People were only able to escape during the brief cease fire in which the killer reloaded his gun after a long and dangerous barrage of gunfire. Assault weapons have much more capacity to cause damage than any ordinary gun. Eliminating them from the streets would most certainly be the first step in increasing safety and reducing gun violence in this country. Category:Home › Other • Pomegranates: A newly discovered superfood • Where did the joke why did the chicken cross the road come from and why is it funny? • Can mothers diagnosed with bipolar disorder make good parents? • Spiritual evolution of human consciousness • Tips for getting a college basketball scholarship • Living with Pseudotumor cerebri (PTC) • Caring for the caregiver • Technologys impact on society