So called "assault weapons" should NOT be prohibited

"Yes, and neither does putting cup holders in a car turn out to be a good thing. if we didn't have cup holders in cars, believe it or not, a'lot of people would be saved on the road because individual drivers would not distract themselves." I am all for removing distractions, it would make the road safer as people wouldn't text and drive, spill drinks on themselves and crash, etc. "Exactly. This is my point. You don't know the law, meanwhile you feel you are capable of debating." I never said I was capable and you challenged me to debate this. Being my 2nd debate, I did not know what I was getting myself into as my first debate wasn't really a debate. I also did not think my comment was going to get me in a 5 round debate so my limited knowledge should have been expected. "I don't want to discuss alcohol because it will go way off topic, but all I will say is rather than banning alcohol or ANYTHING, why not just look for alternative solutions? For example, in Japan, if you drunk drive, the police will revoke your license for LIFE. and it reduced drunk driving deaths SUBSTANTIALLY" That is a good solution but if you don't ban it, people can still drink and drive. If the police don't get them before they potentially crash, people can lose their life's. "But I don't understand. You feel you have the superior authority to control your fellow citizens by telling them they can't drink alcoholic beverages because some people abuse alcohol? I just don't understand that?" Actually, I don't feel like I have the superior authority. That is the government who possesses it. "In medical standard, a white supremacist would not be delusional and messed up in the head. (maybe messed up in the head or brainwashed) but chances are good, if he wasn't on psychiatric drugs, he would not have killed those people." Members of these hate groups take things to extremes. Even if he wasn't on drugs, he probably would have don something. When captured, he shouted " heil Hitler". That guy was going to do something sooner or later. "Your wasting time typing this extra knowledge about how he got it. I know the whole story. It's irrelevant." How am I supposed to know what you know? "Have you heard of a bus or a train? There are a'lot of people who don't drive cars in America. Especially in cities. So I don't understand how you can say people NEED cars if there are buses and trains which people take EVERY DAY in America." Yes, I have heard of a bus and train. So if we were to eliminate cars, public transit would have to readjust to the growing number of people using trains and buses. Some Chicago buses have a similar design to a passenger train, two pieces connected in the middle with a bendy part to hold more passengers. If we were to get rid of cars now, more buses would have to be made to hold a higher capacity. Also, side walks would have to be widened so people walking in congested down town areas don't have to walk in the street. That requires time. "Also, Adam Lanza trained in advance as well. You are throwing in irrelevant knowledge." Actually, if you train with a gun, your performance would be better than if you just give a person a gun who is completely new to them. "Excellent, so you admit it. So if you know there are other firearms capable of killing the same amount of people, why are you just after "assault weapons"?" I think is is better just to remove powerful guns(9 mm and above) from the general public and leave powerful pistols/rifles to people who don't belong to hate groups, who have a clean background check, a clean sanity test, and who completed training with the gun and who will only use it for self defense only. Not for recreational use. I have revised my position due to debating, now I think a partial ban is best suited, banning guns 9 mm and above from the general public. Pea shooters should only be the guns available to the public so if gangs or hate groups get a hold of them, little damage will be done. Guns like assault weapons still have dangerous capabilities since assault means "make a physical attack on." "Exactly. This is my point. You don't know the law, meanwhile you feel you are capable of debating." Remember, I only have 1 debate, and that one was shabby. Plus I did not know what I was getting into due to my inexperience on this site in regards to debating and ignorance of assault weapons.