Quote:
|
Why should civilians be able to posess semi-automatic firearms.
|
For a fast followup shot of course.
The energy used to self load the next round also reduces felt recoil to some degree, so there's that. But those are silly (but truthful) answers to a serious question.
SLR's (self loading rifle) have been around since 1883 (Maxim's 1st machine gun) and 1885 (Mannlicher SLR design), handguns same time frame. Browning's designs came a tad bit later.
They are reliable, reasonably accurate, easy to operate, can be handy in some self defense situations (see Rodney King Riots, L.A. when police withdrew from certain hotspots to regroup... "Ya'll on your own for a while now. Stay safe, we'll be right back").
Should the question come up again, counter with "Why should "law-abiding" Citizens NOT be allowed to possess semi-automatic firearms?" (full auto as well for that matter, but that's another topic all together)
You've read the other responses posted here. Click on the TFL Library link (top bar, each page) do some serious reading, arming yourself with facts, preparing yourself for future encounters. It's not as much fun as going shooting, but you might very well end up introducing others to the sport/culture with your well reasoned responses especially if you invite them to go shooting.
Or at least make them 'think' for a moment or two. ('think' as opposed to 'feel'... painful for some)
I've taken the 'sarcastic' approach more than once and agreed with naysayers telling them that they are right, we should all only be allowed to own black powder flintlock fired muskets, no TV's, radio, computers, autos, aircraft, etc. since they weren't around when the founding fathers wrote the constitution/BOR's. It did give them pause to wonder for a second, then they usually snap back to their 'feelings' wanting to limit or curtail my legal hobby/activity.
Not that your friend is a naysayer, he (or she) may seriously want to know a logic based reason for permission to own or act. Which is kinda sad unto itself.