[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

That being said, I don't think shotguns and "maybe" (my knowledge on guns is very limited) semi automatic weapons are practical for these purposes.

Semi-automatic simply means that the firearm self-loads and prepares for the next shot after it has been fired, it does not mean that the weapon is capable of automatic non-stop firing.

The vast majority of all firearms are at least semi-auto, the only exceptions are some shotguns, revolvers, and hunting rifles.

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Why are shotguns effective for hunting and self defense? Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't shotguns low on range? Wouldn't a manual rifle be more effective with its long range to hunt fast moving targets?

Shotguns with slugs are actually capable of decent range, but what type of shells you use in a hunting shotgun really depends on what you're trying to hunt.

As for self-defense, shotguns are ideal for home-defense because the relative wide spread does not demand as much precision from the operator, the low penetrating power means you won't have to worry about bullets penetrating the wall and hit someone unintentionally, like your family or your neighbor, and it packs a whole lot of stopping power while doing so.

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Why would you want a shotgun for self defense? If you fire it at close range it deemed to cause massive damage and it is most likely to kill than to injure? Unless your idea of self defense is to kill the person attacking you. They are also hard to conceal, so what self defense purposes can they serve to a lady walking down a dark alley all by herself?

shotguns are for self-defense at home, as they obviously cannot be practically carried outside for everyday use.

Also, when you're using a firearm in self defense situations, your only goal is to stop/incapacitate your attacker. Whether your attacker lives or dies is not, and should not be a part of your decision making process at this point - If you're not ready to shoot to kill, then don't bring out the weapon at all, as that only serves as an escalation of force (ie. the attacker see you pull a gun, and decided to pull his too, except while he's ready to use his, you're not willing to pull the trigger).

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

But again, how does my knowledge of weaponry, or lack thereof,e in conflict with the regulations I outlined?

Because you're not making an informed decision with all available information. You say you don't want to ban all guns, yet your initial idea would ban almost all modern firearms. You can't draft a reasonable policy if you don't even understand the criteria you're using to draft said policy.

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Again, I don't need to be gun savvy to realize that many weapons are overkill for self defense and hunting purposes and need to be taken off the shelves. Hell, if you are a gun guru and can prove to me that certain machine guns are perfectly fine for personal use then I would agree with you.

This is another good point. How do you define what's overkill? what is the basis for the criteria you used to create that definition? You admittedly don't know much about weapons in general, and I think it's very safe to assume that you also don't know much about practical self-defense tactics and situations, so how can you decide what is overkill and what's not?

A firearm is both less, and more deadly than you realize. A tiny .22 peashooter can kill a human with one shot if it hits the right spot, yet there are plenty of examples of criminals who did not go down even after taking dozens or more pistol rounds in them.