Robert Hawkins SKS Assault Rifle

eppok,

  By your comments you seemed to be a little better informed than most people. You know who you are. I know this isn't the correct forum for this and this is not an attemp to "One Up" some one else trying to make a point or even ask a qestion which seems like a constant theme on this web site but is a 45lc/45 colt effective against a black bear. Just wondering. As far as hunting goes, I am only going by PA's changing laws and what I read. I read one article that stated that a single shot with 7.62mm X 39mm was not enough to kill a dear with a single shot, thus it was not allowed for hunting medium to large game. Sorry I don't remember the states that this covered. I do know a lot of people have been using the cheaper mosin nagant. Which you probably already know about.

In no way am I advocating banning ak's or sks's.  Some one mentioned the same thing you stated. The ruger mini-30 is probably worse if used in illegal activity vs an sks because of the mags they use. It is quicker to change out a mini-30 mag. Before some one tries to correct me yes I know there are adaptors and they don't work well. Sks's are cheap but they are extremely attractive to many people because they can be customised in a lot of different ways.

I will asked you the questions I have been asking since I started posting before I was drawn into a pointless tech debate. Some one mentioned that a gun is used for protection. I probably wouldn't use a 7.62mm x 39mm weapon for protection due to the fact it is a powerful enough round to go through a wall and take out a neighbor. I had to add that in.

Do you think in the case if the child's step dad used some means to secure that weapon would this still have happened. Messures that would include locks, seperate storage, safes and so on.

One other fact that I find interesting is, people in Isreal or Switzerland have military weapons. From what I read it is a big part of their civil defense plans based on where they are. But yet they seem not to have the same problems with gun violence that the US has. I know I am drifting from the original post but any thoughts.

Sorry I pulled you into a debate, I simply refuse to allow 'assault rifle' and 'assault weapon' to be used interchangably. For God's sake, if the ban that expired in 2004 allowed someone to walk into a Pennsylvania gun store and buy an ak-47 assault rifle - not a semi-auto copy - I would be in opposition. It is a misunderstanding that, in my opinion, has severe consequences.

You have good insight on this subject, and obviously, through your service to the country, have accrued knowledge of weaponry and a common sense opinion toward their deadliness. I know you have valid points to make and I don't enjoy interupting your flow of ideas, unless of course I disagree.

I find it odd to discount the appropriateness of the 7.62 x 39 round for self-defense.  For what purpose did the soviet army issue the round if it were incapable of defending the soldier carrying it?  If the measure of a self-defense round is its inability to potentially harm an innocent, and the measure of a hunting round is subject to a bureaucrat's fiat, the argument concludes with total disarmament.

As to defining "assault rifle," note that California bans "assault weapons," as did the federal government.  Lawyers and politicians can, and often do, use special definitions that differ from "dictionary" definitions.  They don't say "we hereby ban all guns that Webster defines as..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon 

I think he recognizes the effectiveness of the round, he just chooses not to use it for safety's sake (if it's logical to talk about safety in such a situation). Everyone would agree that it is not good if a bullet meant for the bad guy overpenetrates and strikes an innocent person in another room or building.

HanhsG,

  Yes if you wanted to you could use a weapon that uses 7.62mm X 39mm ammunition. But you mentioned the Soviet Army. That round was intended for military use. I live in an urban area. ME personally I would use a pistol using hollow points, hydro shocks, frangibles or shotgun, some thing like the Tuarus Judge that uses .45lc/colt ammo or 2 1/2 410 shot gun shells. I wouldn't use the 45 ammo but the shot gun shot shells. Ofcourse the 7.62mm round is fine but I would use some thing that would have a lesser chance of over penitration. As far as providing Wikipedia links. You may not know this but Wikipedia content is entered in by users and it can be incorrect, or based on opinion.

Quiggles09

  I didn't mind the debate. But take a look at my post before this one. I am asking questions that I wanted a serious answer to. Basically perspective on things that I have been thining about. If you read it you will see I am asking 3 questions. Instead of getting info on things I am wondering about I get a reply on tech info. This has been going on since I started posting. I have only been using definitions to these terms as they have been explained to me by various sources including the military. But how I feel what the meaning of the word is closure to your have stated. Then their are weapons to me that caught between many descriptions.  For example the m14 or the FN FAL. The difference being it uses larger ammo. (7.62mm X 51mm) But I was trying to avoid my own views of these words to try to get insite on the questions that I have been asking.