China has a problem with assault knives

[stanc]

So, what arguments would you make "in favor of our right to own firearms and specifically semi automatic fireaarms" in such a debate with anti-gun people?

Ar type rifles are the most popular hunting rifles in the US today
Sport shooting with many examples such as 3-gun, multi gun, long range and explain the shooting sports are safer than playing football, swimming or riding a bike
Semi autos have been around since the late 1800's
Modern sporting arms are not so modern and less than 1% of all firearm crimes are from semi auto rifles
Even fudd guns used for duck, goose,hunting, etc are semi autos
They are not true assault rifles
The 2ndA is not a right to own antiquated arms
Every firearm is or has been a military weapon
A pump shot gun can fire much more lead quicker than any semi auto firearm
A person is much more likely to die from seeing a doctor than owning and shooting any firearm
Self defence is a right and handicapping civilians with restrictive antiquated firearms will not effect criminals, example Mexico just across the border
Studies indicate that firearms are used over 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances.
Last but not least, the 2ndA is about division of power, not hunting, sport shooting or collecting. Example: democide https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM

I would post videos like this one:https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1169958287556657154
https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1169617849444438016

Below are some counter-arguments that I would make if I were on the other side, and some comments.

[1] "Ar type rifles are the most popular hunting rifles in the US today" - Hunters don't need an AR15 and 30-rd magazines (let alone 100-rd drums) to kill a deer, so why do you think you should have a right to own such a weapon, or feed devices that were created for the sole purpose of killing large numbers of human beings?

[2] "Sport shooting with many examples such as 3-gun, multi gun, long range and explain the shooting sports are safer than playing football, swimming or riding a bike" - 3-gun and multi-gun matches are the simulated killing of people. Why do you want to practice killing a lot of human beings?

[3] "Semi autos have been around since the late 1800's" - Slavery was legal until the mid-1800's. Slavery is no longer legal, so why should semi-autos be?

[4] "Modern sporting arms are not so modern and less than 1% of all firearm crimes are from semi auto rifles" - More than 90% of mass shootings have been done with semi-auto rifles or pistols.

[5] "Even fudd guns used for duck, goose,hunting, etc are semi autos" - Nobody needs a semi-auto shotgun to shoot ducks and geese. The waterfowl hunters I know use pump-action shotguns.

[6] "They are not true assault rifles" - Again, that's a technical distinction without a practical difference. And binary triggers and bump stocks effectively erase even that distinction. What you try to dismiss as an "unreliable toy" was used to efficiently mow down almost 500 people in the space of a few minutes.

[7] "The 2ndA is not a right to own antiquated arms" - True. The 2nd Amendment was about the right to own state-of-the-art military weapons.

[8] "Every firearm is or has been a military weapon" - False. Most guns in civilian hands are not military weapons.

[9] "A pump shot gun can fire much more lead quicker than any semi auto firearm" - LOL. No. https://youtu.be/T8uLv0utmDQ?t=111

[10] "A person is much more likely to die from seeing a doctor than owning and shooting any firearm" - That doesn't explain why you should have a right to own a firearm.

[11] "Self defence is a right and handicapping civilians with restrictive antiquated firearms will not effect criminals, example Mexico just across the border" - You said that a pump shotgun can shoot faster than any semi-auto, so civilians would not be handicapped by a semi-auto ban.

[12] "Studies indicate that firearms are used over 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances." - A valid point, but I'm not sure that dry statistics make a very persuasive argument in a very emotional issue.

[13] "Last but not least, the 2ndA is about division of power, not hunting, sport shooting or collecting." - True. The 2nd Amendment was meant to assure that members of State militias would have access to the weapons they were required to possess under federal law, and the State militias -- not private individuals -- were intended to be a counterbalance to any potential threat posed by the US Army. Since the modern National Guard and the few remaining State militias now provide all required weapons (and prohibit use of privately-owned firearms), the reason for having the 2nd Amendment no longer exists.

Also, the fact that it is not about hunting or sport shooting, negates your points [1], [2], [4], and [5].

[14] "Example: democide https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM " - Again with the democide? If you tell people that you need an AR15 so that you can kill American soldiers or police when they come to drag you off to concentration camps, they're going to think that you're a paranoid nut job who really shouldn't be allowed to have any guns.

[15] "I would post videos like this one: https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1169958287556657154
https://twitter.com/NRA/status/1169617849444438016 " - How are those rants about the NRA being declared a terrorist organization supposed to convince anyone that we should have a right to own an AR15 or any other firearms?

==============================

IMO, if you want to convince "fence sitters" -- let alone anti-gun people -- you'll have to come up with much more persuasive arguments than the above in order to counter the emotional impact of scenes like this: