What do you tell them when they ask: "Why does anyone need military style guns?" From Springfield Armory... Answers to questions most often asked about military firearms. We understand the thrill of shooting military style firearms. We understand the satisfaction of being able to show off a prized addition to a military rifle collection. We understand those feelings and so do you. But our feelings are not necessarily shared by everyone. When your friends, neighbors or co-workers question the validity of military style rifles and handguns as legitimate sporting arms, are you prepared to respond to their queries and criticisms in an intelligent manner? Since most criticism stems from misinformation and from highly emotional stimuli, we've found that the best rebuttal is usually a calm, unemotional response based on facts. We'd like to offer assistance to military firearms enthusiasts who are likely to be subjected to legitimate questions from the curious or scathing attack by hard core anti-gun proponents. So, we're offering this list of the questions and criticisms we've most often heard regarding military style firearms, and the responses we've found to be the most effective in both educating the uninformed and silencing all but the most militant critics. Q. Why would anybody want to buy a military style firearm? A. For much the same reason some people buy antique or reproduction furniture or even classic cars. Military style firearms have a character, a personality and a history that commercial "sporting" firearms simply cannot match. So an original military firearm -- or one based on an original military design -- becomes more than just another gun; it becomes a cherished possession that generates a genuine pride of ownership and, ultimately, becomes very collectible. And, in much the same way a person might choose an expensive high performance vehicle over a bare bones economy model, a serious shooter might choose a military style firearm for its superior accuracy, reliability and technologically advanced design. Military style firearms are designed and built to perform better, last longer, and withstand more abuse than all except the most expensive commercial and "hunting" firearms. So in addition to owning a piece of history purchasing a military style firearm is actually a sound investment in a superior piece of equipment that will likely appreciate in value. Q. Since military style guns can't be used for hunting, what worthwhile sporting purpose could anyone find for a gun like that? A. Military style firearms *can* be used for hunting. In those states that permit hunting with rifles and handguns, they are used very successfully for popular game like deer, elk, caribou, moose, grizzly and wild boar, and for varmints and predators like coyotes, woodchucks and prairie dogs. But hunting is not the only legitimate sporting use of firearms. The most common civilian use of military style firearms is in the many forms of organized national and international shooting competitions that have grown and diversified throughout this century. The annual National Matches at Camp Perry, Ohio, co-sponsored by the Department of Civilian Marksmanship (a governmental department) and the National Rifle Association attracts thousands of enthusiasts who compete in events built around proficient use of authentic American service rifles and pistols. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the United States Practical Shooting Association, the International Practical Shooting Confederation, the World Speed Shooting Association, the NRA and other governing bodies have been instrumental in building the sports of action shooting and practical shooting into first class participation and spectator events both at the local and national level, with several of those major tournaments now enjoying nationally televised coverage. All of those sanctioned, professionally organized events promote the responsible use of military/law enforcement type semiautomatic pistols and revolvers and military style rifles. And since some of those competitions date back to the turn of the century, they must be considered every bit as 'Legitimate" and "traditional" as hunting, trap and skeet shooting. Q. Who really needs a potentially lethal "automatic" rifle or "automatic" pistol for sporting use? A. That's much like asking why so many NASCAR drivers now drive racing cars with automatic transmissions rather than stick shifts. Actually, "automatic" is a misnomer, because most military style rifles and pistols manufactured and sold today are "semiautomatic". That simply means they will cycle a fresh round into the chamber each time the trigger is pulled without manually using a bolt handle, a lever, a pump, or manually cocking the hammer. But semiautomatic rifles and pistols will *not* empty a complete magazine with one pull of the trigger. They are really no more lethal than a capably operated bolt action or lever action repeater or a pump shotgun. Furthermore, supposed "assault" rifles are not the only firearms designed to function semiautomatically. Literally millions of tubular magazine .22 rifles and auto loading shotguns have been manufactured and sold during this century. And although they are commonly used for nothing more "lethal" than hunting game birds or rabbits, shooting at bulls eyes and clay pigeons, or plinking at tin cans, their potential for harm is at least equal to or greater than that of semiautomatic military style firearms. We must point out that the obvious advantage of semiautomatic firearms of any kind -- and the very reason people opt for them-- is the opportunity they afford for a quick follow-up if the shooter misses the target or if the hunter misses his quarry on the first shot. From a competition standpoint, most of the shooting competitions oriented around military style firearms test not only the competitor's ability to shoot accurately, but his quick reaction time, as well. So the speed afforded by semiautomatic firearms is critical. Q. Do only "Rambo" and "Walter Mitty" types buy military style guns? A. Certainly not. Although a military background might be partially responsible for initial interest in military style Firearms, enthusiasts come from virtually every segment of our society, from every social strata, and from every occupational background. Doctors, lawyers and elected officials collect military style firearms with the same enthusiasm as machinists and electricians; educators, accountants and corporate executives compete in military matches with the same intensity as police officers and factory workers; real estate salesmen, insurance agents and screen actors as well as mechanics and merchants trek to their local shooting ranges for a day of target shooting with their favorite military style rifles and pistols. Women and young people are ever becoming more involved, with many competitions providing special categories for females and for youngsters. Junior shooting programs have been part of the Olympic and National Rifle Championships for decades. Q. But these "assault rifles" are so ugly and ominous looking they must be dangerous, so why should anyone be allowed to own one? A. Restrictive legislation based on aesthetic appearances is pretty risky business, because what's handsome and what's not is really a very subjective judgment. And anyone -- legislator or private citizen -- who advocates banning any item based solely on its appearance is obviously guilty of very narrow thinking or has chosen to remain ignorant of that item's actual purpose, use and value. If all items that "resembled" military equipment were banned, the whole series of "CJ" Jeeps would have become extinct years ago. The "assault rifle" appellation is a grossly incorrect "buzz word" that has been effectively used to make semiautomatic rifles sound more threatening and ominous than they really are. Strictly speaking, their semiautomatic function does not satisfy the U.S. Department of Defence's description of an assault rifle, to wit: "Assault rifles are short, compact, select fire weapons that have a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun (pistol) and rifle cartridges". Most of the targeted semi-auto firearms -including the Springfield Armory rifles -- meet none of those criteria. The real question that should be posed is not... "Why does anybody need one?"... but, rather... "Why should responsible citizens not be allowed to own one?" To date, no valid argument has been presented to justify depriving law abiding Americans of their constitutional right to purchase, own or use this or any other type of civilian firearm they choose. It's obvious from the plethora of unsubstantiated innuendoes, untruths and half truths that have been used to perpetuate the semi-auto myth that this issue has become a personal crusade rather than a logical, rational debate in which the rules of fairness and common decency prevail. One cannot make a fair and honest judgment on an issue one does not understand. The simple fact is that those who so strongly advocate the banning of military firearms neither know enough about the objects of their ire nor care enough about the dangerous precedent they are determined to set by robbing American citizens of one of their most fundamental rights. Q. Then why not just limit the size of the magazines available for these high-fire-power semiautomatics? A. Because that's just skirting the real issue rather than realistically addressing the problem. When we attempt to crack down on drunken driving offenses we don't limit the size of automobile engines to four cylinders, nor do we forbid the use or purchase of alcohol to responsible citizens. Instead, we very wisely pass and enforce laws aimed at punishing irresponsible behavior and misuse. The same tactics should be applied to the criminal abuse of firearms -- any firearms, not just semiautomatics. By putting teeth in our current firearms laws and by focusing on punishing the law breakers rather than turning well-intentioned, law abiding citizens into criminals, we can do a much more effective job of controlling firearms related crime. Firearms ownership is both a Constitutional right and a responsibility, and we should hit with the hammers of hell those who abuse that privilege, while defending those whose exemplary behavior has earned them that right. Remember: *All gun owners and firearms enthusiasts should be concerned about any legislation that is intended to limit or prohibit gun ownership. Although much of the anti-gun legislation currently being considered in many state legislatures and even in the United States Congress is ostensibly aimed at semiautomatic military style rifles and "Saturday Night Specials," several of the proposed bills are actually so far reaching as to also limit ownership of firearms as innocuous as certain commercial shotguns and .22 rifles. And we hear time and again that banning this type of gun is a good "first step" toward more gun bans and oth