OK Gunners, why do you need a semi auto weapon.

[boston bean]

A weapon that can fire multiple shots (11, 12, 75 etc.) as fast as your finger can pull the trigger.

What purpose does it have that is so important to you that you just cannot live without it?

What does it offer you that a non semi auto weapon provides?

[Renew Deal]

1. Because it's easier to catch deer and duck

[boston bean]

2. They can't live without them because of that?

[Renew Deal]

4. Yes. Let me send you a machine gun duck recipe.

[safeinOhio]

23. Only three rounds allowed

for duck hunters. I'd go with that.

[Scuba]

8. I've harvested more than 30 deer in my lifetime. Only once did I fire more than one round.

That was to quickly finish a fatally-wounded deer.

Maybe you need to learn to aim better.

By the way, I hunt ducks and pheasant with a pump shotgun, but my labs seem to catch enough birds that haven't even been shot that I often don't need a firearm.

[GGJohn]

25. I would love to trade some venison recipes with you. eom.

[Scuba]

92. Simple: Young deer, prepare as you would lean beef. Old deer, slice thin and stir fry.

You can also grind and mix with pork to make some great sausage.

Venison rack is a traditional Thanksgiving meal in my family.

[GGJohn]

96. Thanks, knew about young deer vs older deer,

didn't know about grind and mix with pork.
Learn something new every day on DU.

One day, I'll post in the food section of DU, my recipe for crockpot venison chili.

[safeinOhio]

28. Anyone that needs lots of bullets fast

should think about giving up hunting and take up fishing.

[GGJohn]

31. Can I do it with TNT?

LOL, just kidding, I love to fish also, Rainbow Trout is my favorite fresh water fish.

[safeinOhio]

95. Mine are Brook Trout.

[GGJohn]

98. Are those much different from the Rainbow Trout? eom.

[safeinOhio]

99. The meat is almost red and very sweet

and you don't have to get up early or stay up late, they feed during the day. May favorite streams to catch them in are only a few feet wide, so you really have to sneak up on them. Brookies first, then brown and then rainbow are the best in my part of the country.

I now live in Michigan

[treestar]

70. Isn't the sport part of it ?

Wouldn't that make it too easy ?

[onehandle]

3. If you get really mad and have a large family, it's more efficient.

...kinda.

Guns are mostly a danger to wives and children.

[Renew Deal]

7. Guns have only one purpose. Death

And people want the best killing machine possible. They might say it is for protection, but in too many cases we need protection from THEM.

[librarylu]

58. And co-workers.

And perfect strangers.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. I don't believe the owners of semi auto weapons need them to use them as much

as they need them to assert superiority and authority over those who don't have them. In other words, to threaten anyone who threatens them.

I suspect that members of Congress are worried about constituents and then some coming to threaten them for banning their security blankets.

[Duckhunter935]

6. there is no department of need

You do not need a car or alcohol that kill tens of thousands also. They are legal and the most widely used weapons sold.

[onehandle]

9. You clearly don't know what a weapon is.

Once again proving that gun ownership should be subject to a fuckload of scrutiny.

[Duckhunter935]

18. I do

Weapon knowledge should be required to own one in my opinion.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. How come you dont 'want your own suitcase nuke?

That is how much sense THAT makes....

[Duckhunter935]

53. I do not think

That mass destructive devices like bombs are legal and I could not think of a lawfull purpose for them.

So you think you should have no knowledge or training to own a firearm, that's crazy in my opinion. I am for gun safety and that is a big part of it.

[Renew Deal]

11. Guns have one purpose. Death

Guns can be used intentionally to kill or accidentally to kill, but there is no other use. Practicing killing is not another use.

[Duckhunter935]

17. mine must all be broken

Have not killed a fly and I do not practice to kill. Many of mine are old bolt action military weapons though. Glad they will no longer kill anything.

[Thor_MN]

30. So obviously not what the OP asked about.

I'm sure you know that bolt action firearms are not semi automatics.

What is your answer to the OP's question?

Why does one need a semi automatic weapon?

[Duckhunter935]

32. the same reason I need my bolt action rifles

They are legal and I like to shoot at paper plates. They have low recoil and are accurate. I like the low recoil part as it is better on my shoulder. My AR-15 rifles are modular so I can change out the upper reliever and change calibers without having to have multiple weapons. They can be worked on by me without having to take them to a gunsmith.

[Thor_MN]

39. Thank you for answering.

So is it fair to say that your answer is amusement? You enjoy shooting them and tinkering with them.

FWIW, I would call amusement more of a want than a need, but YMMV.

[Duckhunter935]

42. true I do not need anything more than food and water

My car, tv, cell phone, privacy, and house is a want also I guess.

[Thor_MN]

43. Back to the distractions...

Have a nice day.

[Duckhunter935]

46. yes truth is a distraction

You too have a great day

[smirkymonkey]

84. Oh FFS, you can't be real.

[morningfog]

89. Not weapons. For fucks sake don't act like an idiot.

[ileus]

10. I could live without them...but why.

It offers the ability to fire more than 2-5 rounds without reloading.

What's not to love. Fun at the range and more rounds to protect my family with.

On family fun range day I can hand the ARs over to the kids or wife and they can have 30 rounds of fun before having to reload. Bring 10 or 20 mags to the range and you don't have to waste time reloading and everyone can keep having fun.

For self defense having 9-20 rounds on standby is comforting when everyone knows the percentage of hits is really low. My wife does choose to carry a 5 round revolver for her personal safety firearm, but that's because she can't rack any of my semi-auto pistols beyond the 22's.

When saving lives which would you rather have 5 rounds or 12? My life and the life of the kids are my #1 moral obligation I'll protect them with the best options as long as they are legal.

[BeyondGeography]

29. Have you ever fired a gun to protect your family?

[Duckhunter935]

35. I have not

And hope I never have to. I do not ever see that as being an issue. Most of the time they are stored in my gun safe.

[MillennialDem]

49. What Jim Jefferies said is true. Your only argument for having a gun is

"I like guns, fuck off"

Needing them for protection the numbers just do not add up...

A panic room would do you more good than a gun, but 99.9% of gunners don't have a panic room. I wonder why. Could it be that most gunners have psychotic fantasies or are compensating for some mental or physical issue instead of really caring about protection?

[Duckhunter935]

52. I own a legal product

And as long as it is legal and I use the weapon in a safe way, yes i will continue to want and own them for lawfull activities. I do not have a safe room as I am not afraid of a home invasion and do not think it would be cost effective. I have thought about a tornado safe space as I do not have a basement.

[MillennialDem]

54. Disregards what I said. Again, guns are for MOST just about an inflated sense of self

esteem and bullying others. What you use your guns for I don't particularly give a shit, you are one person. I am talking about the whole group.

Those who claim to care about home invasions should be building safe rooms, or at least pseudo safe rooms (in addition to or in place of their gun(s) doesn't really matter). They don't do that, it's all about the chance to blast an intruder that gets their rocks off.

Body armor and reinforced exterior doors would also be good ideas too in their cases, but these are also very rarely used.

[Duckhunter935]

55. opinions like yours

Everyone has one just like certain body parts. Tell where you came up with that MOST Bull Pull that one from where the sun does not shine?

[MillennialDem]

56. Nice ad hom. Guess I struck a nerve.

[Duckhunter935]

59. nope not at all just pointing out

You are making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about.

[MillennialDem]

60. No, I'm not. You just have no good response because you know I got you.

[Duckhunter935]

61. how, by spouting some statistic

You made up? Oooh, you got me!

[MillennialDem]

64. That nerve will feel better tomorrow. Sorry.

[Duckhunter935]

65. what nerve, I feel great now

Tomorrow, colonoscopy so I might not feel as good, lol

[MillennialDem]

67. Awww, can't refute my argument still. Just claim "it's bullshit". I'm sure they'll find it all kinds

of it in your exam tomorrow.

[Duckhunter935]

68. how can I refute an argument

with facts you made up? You can't seem to tell me where you came up with that. Have a great one

[MillennialDem]

69. No, I asked why do so few gunners have any kind of panic room, even a homemade one?

[Duckhunter935]

72. I have no idea

But my guess is most firearms owners are not afraid or willing to spend thousands if not tens of thousands for a good safe room.

[MillennialDem]

76. I didn't say good safe room. I said any safe room. I've heard numerous people say they have

a gun in case of a burglar. Never once heard one say they have a panic room.

Apparently there's a price tag on safety now? Converting the closet or master bathroom into a relatively safe room - secure door and some general dense material to stop bullets wouldn't cost much at all.

[Duckhunter935]

79. I call you out on that my friend

Hundreds of dollars just for a steel or solid door with locks and heavy duty hinges. Not to mention you would have to line all of the walls as sheet rock will not even stop a low velocity pistol round or a person breaking through. A firearm is much cheaper if that is the need.

[MillennialDem]

81. Maybe $1,000 for a security door and essentially free for some sandbags or other junk - old broken

fridges you could get for free at the dump or a million other pieces of nearly free junk.

I said this could be in addition to a firearm. If someone breaks into your house with a gun of their own, they MIGHT shoot through the walls or door. They're not going to break it down to make sure you're dead. They'd probably just grab a couple pieces of loot and leave.

[EX500rider]

90. "Never once heard one say they have a panic room."

Maybe they don't feel like hiding while all their belongings are stolen by some lowlife?
Maybe they think they may not have time to get to another room?
Maybe a gun is a lot cheaper?
Maybe they like to go to the gun range as a hobby?
Maybe they buy firearms as a investment?
Maybe they hunt?

[MillennialDem]

97. 1. Defensive position to shoot said lowlife. 2. Not required one needs to get to the other room, it'

s still beneficial. 3. Gun and panic room are not mutually exclusive, though you could maybe make the case for someone who only has money for the gun. But they likely have enough money for both. 4, 5, and 6: still not mutually exclusive.

[GGJohn]

71. How about some links to back up that argument?

Because I did the Google thing and can't find one link to prove what you claim is true.

[Duckhunter935]

74. now he or she is moving the goalposts

When asked where they pulled that number from. Normal for them when called on their bull pucky

[treestar]

73. Yeah if really afraid of

Not only home intrusion but in large numbers the panic room would be safer and worth doing.

[boston bean]

77. These gun nuts are going to turn this country into a place where every home needs one.

It's fucking sick.

[treestar]

101. and every school building

church, etc.

[boston bean]

102. planned parenthood already has them.

It's fucking crazy that this is what we allow our country to become.

Why so people can own killing machines that work in such a way that you can kill dozens in minutes?

[smirkymonkey]

85. +1000

[Hoyt]

48. Glad you are happy with all your gunz, oblivious to the harm to society.

[EL34x4]

12. OK boston bean, why do you need another anti-gun vanity thread.

What does this thread offer you that the several others you've posted in the last 24 hours haven't provided?

[Renew Deal]

13. No vanity. It's another angle.

She needs to keep it up.

[boston bean]

15. With every single "point" they try to make, it brings up another very

pertinent question.

[Recursion]

21. Hm

I think of "vanity" as an FR term, not a DU term...

[EL34x4]

24. I didn't realize FR had exclusive use

of the term "vanity thread."

[Renew Deal]

26. I thought this was an Internet term, but this is what I got

[treestar]

75. Isolates a different issue

[smirkymonkey]

86. Grow up.

[jmg257]

14. Personally, I chose them for ease of use, speed, functionality

And capacity.

I much preferred carrying a SA pistol then a revolver when an LEO.
And prefer SA shotgun over pump for some of the same reasons.

Of course bolt actions have their use, but advances in reliability and accuracy and ammo have made the semis just as and often more viable.

Edit to add: semis which are or are based on military designs have been very well vetted, so the confidence in the reliability of the arm, and availability of ammo, mags etc are a real plus.

[pipoman]

16. 100,000,000+ @ $500 (ave) is certainly one motivation

The standard for over 80 years.

In their absence do you believe it would be rainbows and jellybeans or would people who wish to kill just use lever actions, pump actions, and other to-be-determined actions, ied's?

I think pretending this is solely to do with access to guns as opposed to the very real actual cause, the desire of a few to kill people enmass...

[Recursion]

19. For the most part that's all that's manufactured nowadays

I think that's a big part of their popularity.

[dawg]

20. I think you are barking up the wrong tree by going after semi-automatics.

Having to manually cock a gun doesn't make any more or less lethal.

I think it makes more sense to ban high-capacity magazines. It would also make sense to limit the number of magazines an individual can own, since they can be pre-loaded and easily swapped on the fly.

Likewise, I think there should be limits on how much ammunition a person can accumulate before some sort of investigation is triggered.

But some semi-automatics are no more dangerous than their manual-action counterparts.

[COLGATE4]

22. Assuming we're talking about legitimate use of a firearm

semi-automatic merely means that the firearm in question auto reloads without the necessity of additional action(s) on the part of the user. A non semi-automatic weapon requires the user to carry out some additional action in order to fire it a second (and more, successively) times. It's more an issue of the number of additional rounds that can be fired without having to manually reload.

An easy example of this is when the firearm is used for hunting. A semi-automatic rifle permits the user to sight in the target and then be able to fire more than one shot without the need to reload. When hunting deer for example, the hunter may often miss the first shot. Having the rifle reload itself without the need for anything additional permits the hunter to take a second shot while still remaining on target. With a non semi-automatic (i.e. single shot) rifle would require manually opening the breech, ejecting the spent shell and then closing the breech before trying to reacquire the target in the rifle's sights. Doing this causes the hunter to lose visual orientation of the target, greatly enhancing the possibility of missing the target.

[longship]

33. Translation: semi-auto == more death and distruction.

I am glad that you made that clear.

[COLGATE4]

34. Brilliant. Do you write for a living?

[longship]

38. I have in the past. But my forte is math, not writing.

In fact, I cannot believe that people would actually pay for my screeds.

I prefer teaching math, which I did for years.

[COLGATE4]

40. Stick with teaching math.

[longship]

47. I will stand by my translation my friend.

Because, although I may not be a great writer, I still understand English. And your post argues for semi-auto because it is easier to kill. There is no denying that.

That is why access to such things should be controlled. You made the justification quite clear yourself.

QED

[longship]

50. BTW, my best friend, a long time hunter, says this about your topic.

If you cannot drop a deer in one shot, you are doing it wrong. A bolt action is all one needs.

[Duckhunter935]

63. of course the 2nd amendment

Is not about hunting

[longship]

93. You are right.

The 2nd amendment is about arming militias.

[Straw Man]

111. If your friend is so good, ...

BTW, my best friend, a long time hunter, says this about your topic.

If you cannot drop a deer in one shot, you are doing it wrong. A bolt action is all one needs.

... why does he need a bolt action? It's a repeater, after all. A Ruger #1 single-shot should be more than enough.

In a sense he's right -- in a perfect world, one shot should do it. However, if that first shot doesn't put the deer down immediately, the humane thing is to deliver a follow-up as quickly as possible.

[COLGATE4]

116. In theory that's correct. But even the best hunters

have problems hitting the target in bad light, and with obstructions like leaves, etc. If you need to take a second shot you're pretty much out of luck if you're using a bolt action. Once you move away from the scope to rachet the bolt and try to reacquire the target the target is long gone.

[MohRokTah]

27. Prior to the Assault Weapon Ban of 1994, the semi-automatic weapons that look...

so scary to you were rarely owned by civilians. A few collectors had them.

Overall, semi-automatic weapons were in widespread legal all use, about 40% of all weapons held by civilians were semi-automatic.

The test set forth by the SCOTUS on arms that could not be effectively banned was that any weapon in widespread legal use could not be banned, thus, as a category of weapons, semi-automatic weapons can NEVER be banned constitutionally.

So the Congress invented a new category of weapons as a sub-category of semi-automatic weapons and defined them by certain cosmetic features. They named these "Assault Weapons".

Politically, the only way to ban this new category of weapon was to sunset the ban after ten years.

When the ban sunset happened, people bought the weapons in droves out of fear the ban would be renewed. Effectively, the ban created a widespread demand for these "Assault Weapons".

Now, they are in widespread legal use, thus they can never again be banned.

[Duckhunter935]

36. of course over the last 30+ years

Many former military purchase a civilian version of the weapon they are familiar with. That would be a AR pattern rifle. I think that is also part of it.

[MohRokTah]

44. Prior military were the primary drivers in the widespread purchases after the sunset of the ban.

Were I to purchase weapons for personal use, I would prefer an AR-15 and a 1911A1 .45 ACP as I am very familiar with both after my time in the Army.

[pipoman]

109. The "in common use for lawful purposes" SCOTUS standard

Has been in place since USA v. Miller in the 1930's...it has been used by other courts since including Heller and MacDonald...

[hack89]

37. Light weight, low recoil, ergonomic, accurate

all good reasons to buy one, especially if you want you whole family to enjoy shooting.

[Shrek]

41. When quail flush they fly fast and unpredictably

They fly out of range pretty quickly and using an semi-auto means you may get an extra shot.

With practice you can learn to be nearly as fast with a pump-action, but the motion is disruptive to the sight pattern. It's much easier to stay on target if you don't have to manually eject and reload.

[aikoaiko]

45. My standard is that if civilian police can have them then NICS checked nonLEO civilians should too

After all, criminals are generally committing violent crimes against regular folk, not cops.

[cantbeserious]

57. This Citizen Suspects That Gun Orgasm Is Much More Intense When Discharging A Full Load

eom

[PowerToThePeople]

62. They do not. Ban them all.

Ban all Guns!!!

[Duckhunter935]

66. always nice to dream

[Facility Inspector]

78. Higher rate of fire?

[napi21]

80. I can only tell you what my son answered when I asked the same question....

"Geeesh mom,s because they're fun to shoot!"

He doesn't own one and probably never will. He only ever shot one whil;e at a range using one that belonged to a friend. I only knew one other person who had an unusual weapon...a bazooka! he had to get a permit to buy it and when asked why he wanted it, his response was always "It's FUN!"

For those who who buy the for fun, it's a shame that those who buy them for malicious reasons have created a situation where they will have to be outlawed.

[Elmergantry]

82. Well

"What does it offer you that a non semi auto weapon provides?"

I can fire more rounds quicker with less reloading.

Why do you ask?

[etherealtruth]

83. Yep .... it really helps to up the body count when the previous good guy with a gun ...

... crosses that line to bad guy with a gun

[Elmergantry]

104. And your point is?

Other than misusing a weapon is bad? The question was why I would want a semi-auto. It was answered.

[etherealtruth]

105. I was validating your point

[Elmergantry]

106. Ok. Glad you agree with me. nt

[smirkymonkey]

87. They dont. No reason is good enough.

They will give you plenty of reasons, all of them pathetic.

[Kurska]

88. Because then you'll be asking "Why do you need a bolt action, just use a muzzle loader"

If you think gun owners have any reason to engage with gun control advocates after the orgy of "Ban them all, round up the owners and thrown them in jail!" you're insane.

[morningfog]

91. Nothing but the delusion of being tough. They are pathetic.

They are pond scum and they are holding this country back.

Not sure the damage can be undone now.

[Duckhunter935]

94. so is that all firearms owners?

[Reter]

100. Let's say Russia attacks us full force

Both countries agree not to use nukes. Let's just say a rifle isn't going to be enough. Another reason is what if to fight tyranny if it happens.

[krispos42]

103. And this goes exactly to a point I've made before

A daily, hourly DEMAND that people provide proof of something to put them on the defensive. The threat is that if you can't justify it, then you will take it away from other people.

You're being very conservative on this issue in that you think you can stand in the way of progress and technical development. You seem to think you can just "lock" firearms technology at 1915 levels. You know, the "good old days". Your side tried it with various "assault weapons bans" to limit things like protruding pistol grips. and it failed to do anything except a) boost gun sales, and b) get Republicans in office.

You seem to think that shooting a gun should be a difficult, painful, and slow process and that you can somehow lock those features into guns for all eternity. You seem to think that there will be no technical progress, no further development, nothing.

How about a pump-action AR-15? They have those now. Takes all the same parts (except the few that turn it from a gas-action semiautomatic to a manual-action pump) including barrels, triggers, stocks, grips, rails, optics, magazines, etc.

Do you call that progress? Do you really thing that will impede terrorists or nutcases? How many more decades of Republican rule are you willing to accept to achieve your goals?

[Elmergantry]

107. Well said:

"Do you call that progress? Do you really thing that will impede terrorists or nutcases? How many more decades of Republican rule are you willing to accept to achieve your goals? "

[sarisataka]

108. Semi auto weapons

Are what I was trained to use and I am most proficient with them in stress fire situations. I assume you would prefer I hit my target with the first shot...

[nadinbrzezinski]

110. Ignorant and emotional OP that solves nothing and creates zero conversation

or education.

By the way, if your dad or grand dad owned an M1 Garand, guess what? THAT IS A FUCKING SEMI AUTOMATIC, MILITARY GRADE WEAPON... THAT DOES NOT LOOK SCARY TO YOU.

[Throd]

112. Maybe I just want one.

I don't own one BTW.

But I own lots of things I don't need.

[Snobblevitch]

113. Seimi-auto weapons have in public circulation

for over 100 years. They are already out there and are not going anywhere. Need is not a factor.

[Adrahil]

114. I don't expect that I'll ever nedd to use my guns in earnest.

But if I ever do, I want one that's best for the job.

[beevul]

115. Because bolt action and break action firearms...

Because bolt action and break action firearms don't enrage anti-gunners enough...that they'll admit yet, although the brady bunch did take issue with scoped rifles some time back, so you're a bit behind.

Having one is necessary to poke them in the eye, like they've been trying to poke US in the eye all these years.

I'm actually considering acquiring an AR pattern rifle, not because I need one, not even because I really want one. I prefer a scoped higher caliber rifle personally...but...I know that people possessing them pisses off the anti-gun crowd, so that alone makes them very attractive. Culture war works both ways.

Any other questions?

[Elmergantry]

117. Make sure you give it a pet name...

like "death spewer" (my personal favorite!)

[beevul]

118. If I ever do, I'll be sure to...

Hell, maybe I'll make it a pair, and name one 'common' and the other 'sense'.

[Elmergantry]

119. perfect!