Whether there is a "need" for military-type semiauto weapons in the hands of civilians is beside the point. There is no "need" for hunting, period, in modern society--but the 2nd amendment is not about hunting. Anti-gun politicians, pandering for your vote, will tell you that they're not out to take away "hunters' guns"--that is, unless said hunter happens to hunt with something that bears some resemblance to a weapon carried either by the US or foreign militaries. And many of those same pols ignore the fact that people hunt with handguns--and for the most part, the same people that are anti-"assault rifle" are also anti-handgun.
Divide and conquer is the strategy of the anti-gun crowd. And unfortunately, Zumbo's rash statement was quickly picked up and used by the anti-gun crowd, providing ready proof of just how harmful such views can be, to gun owners in general.
Hunters are a relatively small minority in this country--something in the neighborhood of 5-7% or so of the population. Gun owners are also a minority, but a much larger minority. In fact, I think (from past discussions) that we have quite a few non-hunting gun owners that frequent this site--even though the guns they own aren't mostly of the type to which Zumbo referred.
I stand with all law-abiding owners of legal firearms. And that's where we'd better ALL stand, if we don't want our minority to grow even smaller.
