Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you do think Government should have the right to tell everyone what constitutes "arms".
There's the difference.
I don't.
Yes and according to the 2nd arms is a weapon a man can hold and carry, and not a bomb that shoots, so you will get no RPG and i will not fight that fight for anyone to have one.
A tripod base machine gun is not a arm according the to 2nd.... I think according to the 2nd you and or I should be able to buy and own with no infringement a m-16 a AK-47 both in select fire fire versions, sub machine guns should be fine, but a tripod mounted gun might be my limit.
No grenades and no bombs no artillery should apply under the 2nd, but you may still buy and own these they way you can now.... and where applicable. For all I care you can buy and own a B-2 Bomber so long as you have the money and can pass the muster...... being legal.
But that isn't the way i understand the 2nd to mean.
And the second amendment also does not say restrict weapons except for the criminals either....but yet that is exactly what is happening...
So basically all the 2nd Amendment allows you the right to bear arms, it doesn't say anything about which arms you are allow to bear. Basically that is up to us Americans to decide what is okay and what isn't, and that isn't a violation of the Constitution.
Yes and according to the 2nd arms is a weapon a man can hold and carry, and not a bomb that shoots, so you will get no RPG and i will not fight that fight for anyone to have one.
A tripod base machine gun is not a arm according the to 2nd.... I think according to the 2nd you and or I should be able to buy and own with no infringement a m-16 a AK-47 both in select fire fire versions, sub machine guns should be fine, but a tripod mounted gun might be my limit.
No grenades and no bombs no artillery should apply under the 2nd, but you may still buy and own these they way you can now.... and where applicable. For all I care you can buy and own a B-2 Bomber so long as you have the money and can pass the muster...... being legal.
But that isn't the way i understand the 2nd to mean.
lol...
I knew you weren't a country bumpkin. Though I wouldn't care if you were. You have an excellent command of language broth'r. I respect your view.
~namaste
Yes and according to the 2nd arms is a weapon a man can hold and carry, and not a bomb that shoots, so you will get no RPG and i will not fight that fight for anyone to have one.
A tripod base machine gun is not a arm according the to 2nd.... I think according to the 2nd you and or I should be able to buy and own with no infringement a m-16 a AK-47 both in select fire fire versions, sub machine guns should be fine, but a tripod mounted gun might be my limit.
No grenades and no bombs no artillery should apply under the 2nd, but you may still buy and own these they way you can now.... and where applicable. For all I care you can buy and own a B-2 Bomber so long as you have the money and can pass the muster...... being legal.
But that isn't the way i understand the 2nd to mean.
Agreed. In Swizerland the military sells their surplus to the civilians, and that includes anti-air machine guns etc heavy stuff. If you can afford it, it's yours.
No denial, just spliiting hairs like I have seen you do so many times throughout these boards...
You're getting good at splitting hairs. Yes, grand-fathered "assault" rifles (pre 1994) are OK in MA.
Quote:
And your vote is going to help get hussein elected again....(maybe)
Like I said, I do not want to spend the next four years telling myself "how could I vote for this idiot". That's what would happen if I voted for Romney or Obama. This is also why I did not vote for McCain or Obama in 2008. I'll vote, but mostly on other offices (federal and local), and on local issues.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 10-15-2012 at 06:17 AM..
I knew you weren't a country bumpkin. Though I wouldn't care if you were. You have an excellent command of language broth'r. I respect your view.
~namaste
That is kinda upsetting, that country bumpkin thang i am pretty sure i am a old long hair country boy , which is a country bumpkin and to tell the truth i am kinda proud of it
Check out my profile picture because it really is me!
So Fin, you are serious about thinking Mitt might write anti gun law and get away with it, and this is a part of the reason you might vote for Obama?
walidm. you too?
I was not going to vote for anyone at that level period....... I just don't like Mitt and i don't like Mass either, be living in NH is like living behind the Iron Curtain. I go no where un-armed, and so I must pass thru Ma and NY to go anywhere.... Canada is no better option armed and is in fact worse.
I simply ignore state law since I think of it as illegal in the first place. How they get away with that Shall not be Infringed i have no idea.
I do carry a paper copy of the CONS and i am willing to fight it out with any LEO who wants my hide sent off to jail... A choice i can't make but the LEO can...
On the other hand I am not the criminal type and so I don't get stopped. i rode a motorcycle with my wife in 40 states all one trip aiming for ll 48 states and never was stopped once. Until of course I got back in NH, which is becoming a Police State and has for a long time. NH appears to be some sort of Federal experiment, but I am legal here, and can mock out State Police and or Border Parole as I please since they so far can't shut me up and I still have the 1st...
As you can see I am no hard liner either except for where it applies to me and my Freedoms. Both parties are after freedoms and both parties are so big they should fail.....
The Dems just grow it out of sight as if they were feeding miracle grow, but there isn't any better money for them than there is for us and they seem to have no idea these dollars are just subsidised play money.
subsidised past participle, past tense of sub·si·dize (Verb)
Verb:
Support (an organization or activity) financially.
Pay part of the cost of producing (something) to reduce prices for the buyer.
I think Mitt will listen better, while his record is grim, but a grim record is better than No Record. Another point is Mitt can actually open his mouth and talk!
So Fin, you are serious about thinking Mitt might write anti gun law and get away with it
Yes, I think he probably would sign such bills, and he would not care about "getting away with it". He got away with in in MA.
Quote:
and this is a part of the reason you might vote for Obama?
I already told you I do not plan to vote for Obama or Romney.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i am pretty sure i am a old long hair country boy 
