There is no such thing as "Need" when it comes to these things. 99% of material objects are just a want. That being stated, tell me why they don't need these firearms.
I've been on both sides of this debate & firmly stand planted on the side where people are allowed to own them. Why shouldn't they? These firearms that are legal to own civilian wise are semi automatic. Their full auto & three round burst cousins are military issue not cilvian issued.
Realistically, their caliber don't amount to much. It's their classification as a "Assult Rifle" that's giving them their bad name & reputation. Ar 15 for example, .223 round if im not mistaken. Did you know their exists a hunting rifle with the exact same caliber? Wait! This cannot be true, it fires the same rounds but, it's not an "Assult Rifle". It's a "Hunting Rifle".
Why do we need these things? Awnser, we don't. Anymore then we need the newest car or the most popular video game. Should "Assult Rifles" be banned from public use? Hell no, no faster then a pistol should be banned. Realistically, what purpose does it serve? Shotguns & Rifles are hunting weapons. Pistols are for "self defense", same argument the above mentioned weapons can be classified under.
End of point, asking why we "Need" something triggers the opposite effect of "Why don't we need" it. You can't judge a book by its cover anymore then a gun by it's name. In Louisiana, I can take a 12 guage shotgun & cut the barrel down below 24 inches. Throw a pistol grip on it & register it as a handgun. Legally owning a sawed off shotgun. Why? Because now, it's a large caliber pistol rather then a shotgun.
Does this make it right? No, does the way a gun looks or it's caliber make it a "Assult Weapon"? No more then saying you don't take it deer hunting, which by the way is also legal as far as calliber goes.
