• Yes, heres why:

    I use a Mini-14 for Coyote hunting, it is completely stock (save for a scope). If I were to put on a pistol grip in states that have a "one-feature" test (i.E. California), then it would be an illegal gun, just because I put on a pistol grip. The pistol grip would just make the gun more comftorable to shoot. How does that makes sense? I belive that no matter how tricked out or "scary" they look, they are all a Mini-14 (Metaphor) on the inside.

  • As the question is stated, I have to say yes.

    I believe the second admendment quarentees us the "right" to own firearms, even assault weapons. So to its legitimate purpose for hunting, that is a persnoal use issue. It can be used for huntung. Are there better coices, most likely. But The constitution allows us to decide that question for ourselves.

  • Yes, assault weapons will definitely be needed for hunting.

    If these loathsome sadists use a rifle to hunt down poor coyotes then us sensible, sane people are going to need better equipment in dealing with these morally bankrupt lunatics that go about blamming animals over any fragile, selfish excuse they can find. So yes, assault rifles will, in fact, be needed in getting rid of some pests.

  • Assault weapons are not needed for hunting

    Assault weapons are not needed for hunting. This is because of the fact that when humans were hunter-gatherers, we didn't even have regular firearms. Much of hunting was done with bow and arrow or spear. Assault weapons are something that can be used to hunt animals with, but are not necessary for hunting.

  • No, but that is not a reason to ban them.

    No, assault weapons are not needed for hunting, because there are lot of ways to hunt. Shotguns are useful for hunting. Bows and arrows are useful for hunting as well. Assault weapons are not weapons for hunting. But that is not a reason to ban assault weapons. They are important to our freedom.

  • No They Are Not

    I think it is unreasonable to think that assault weapons are needed for hunting. Assault weapons really have no purpose is common, everyday society. Assault weapons are a good measure of protection in an insecure country, such as Syria, at the moment. Assault weapons while currently legal in the United States could easily be banned, in my opinion.

  • No that's overkill.

    Assault weapons are not needed for hunting, that seems like overkill to me. If a person is hunting because they will actually use every part of the animal and intend on eating it or doing something with it other than just sport than they would not need that type of weapon.

  • One Bullet Can Kill

    Assault weapons aren't needed to hunt animals. It only takes one bullet to the head or neck in order to kill an animal. Pumping it full of lead ruins the meat. Assault weapons aren't needed except for protection for members of the military on the battlefield. That's why they are called assault weapons--they are designed for assaulting the enemy, not for killing animals.

  • They really aren't.

    Very long ago, our human ancestors hunted for food. They had not developed firearms yet. They used a device known as a "bow" to launch missiles known as "arrows", which consisted of a stick with a sharp rock on one end and feathers on the other. If a bunch of cavemen can live off of what they kill with a bow, I think that a modern man can satisfy their desire for recreational hunting with a bow or anything better than a bow with very few problems.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.