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.
link? I'm not disputing you, but would like to find out more.
I would argue that the heart of the technology lies in the cartridge, not the gun. The gun is just a dispenser. So 'assault weapon' bans are akin to banning sales of canned beer to minors, but not bottled beer. Not quite, but headed in that direction.
Jeff Cooper, the 'gunners guru' used to argue that the lever & bolt actions gave up very little to semi-autos. The skill level of the user makes far more difference than the action type.
Hence if an 'assault weapon' ban is constitutional, why wouldn't a lever or bolt ban also be unconstitutional? Then we end up with a 2nd Amendment that is meaningless.
Indeed the technology of the 5.56 cartridges has improved significantly in the past 6 years alone. Made in the USA
The Col. (RIP) was correct. I've had the priviledge of personally witnessing one of his former instructors run a bolt .308 alongside the M14 platform in a carbine operators course, keeping up and making better hits all the while hand feeding rounds while running that bolt on the move.
When our colonies overcame tyranny the first time we were a nation of riflemen. To our roots we should return.
Also, how is a ban on assault rifles an infringement of the 2nd Amendment? If it is, I should be allowed to buy a bazooka, anti-aircraft missiles, and a tank. The Supreme Court was very clear that Congress has a right to reasonably regulate firearms. As such, impeachment over this is nothing more than a right-wing wet-dream.
Exactly, and that's where the true ignorance lies in this debate.... The true morons point to the 2nd Amendment and decry that their freedoms are being infringed upon..
Well news-flash. You aren't sitting there whining that you cannot own an ICBM, so obviously you understand that there's a limit to what arms one can own.
The question is simply a matter of where the line is on what arms one can own. I don't mind arguing that point at all, but don't hide behind the 2nd Amendment here. It's a very misleading and disingenuous argument.
Indeed the technology of the 5.56 cartridges has improved significantly in the past 6 years alone. Made in the USA
The Col. (RIP) was correct. I've had the priviledge of personally witnessing one of his former instructors run a bolt .308 alongside the M14 platform in a carbine operators course, keeping up and making better hits all the while hand feeding rounds while running that bolt on the move.
You appear to support an assault weapons ban. Please explain why. Also, I'm pretty sure the talk of impeachment is for Holder due to Fast & Furious. It's not regarding an assault weapons ban.
I support an assault weapon ban because there is no legitimate reason that hunters or target shooters require such a weapon and can cause massive deaths.
Exactly, and that's where the true ignorance lies in this debate.... The true morons point to the 2nd Amendment and decry that their freedoms are being infringed upon..
Well news-flash. You aren't sitting there whining that you cannot own an ICBM, so obviously you understand that there's a limit to what arms one can own.
The question is simply a matter of where the line is on what arms one can own. I don't mind arguing that point at all, but don't hide behind the 2nd Amendment here. It's a very misleading and disingenuous argument.
I understand that an ICBM or a M1 Abrams are beyond my financial reach and thus whining would be pointless. However, if Google can own a fighter jet and park it courtesy the US taxpayer where no other private planes are allowed, ever, why cannot other Americans? Are we not allowed equal protection under the US Constitution?
The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect the people from a tyrannical government. Unfortunately through legislation and the sheer cost of military grade weapons it would seem tyranny will in the not too distant future possibly choose to squash the people like Shaquil O'Neill's court shoes stepping on an ant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
I support an assault weapon ban because there is no legitimate reason that hunters or target shooters require such a weapon and can cause massive deaths.
The 2nd Amendment was not designed for only hunters and target shooters, no matter how much the Progressive gun grabbers would like to re-write history.
Exactly, and that's where the true ignorance lies in this debate.... The true morons point to the 2nd Amendment and decry that their freedoms are being infringed upon..
Well news-flash. You aren't sitting there whining that you cannot own an ICBM, so obviously you understand that there's a limit to what arms one can own.
The question is simply a matter of where the line is on what arms one can own. I don't mind arguing that point at all, but don't hide behind the 2nd Amendment here. It's a very misleading and disingenuous argument.
My response draws out where that line is drawn. The question then relates to Congress' right to ban weapons it deems too dangerous to allow possession -- such as assault rifles.
I understand that an ICBM or a M1 Abrams are beyond my financial reach and thus whining would be pointless. However, if Google can own a fighter jet and park it courtesy the US taxpayer where no other private planes are allowed, ever, why cannot other Americans?
Have you ever bothered to check if the fighter jet carries any real ordnance?
I'm guessing there aren't any Sidewinders included with Google's jet.
What percentage of legally purchased assault rifles are used to commit crimes? Last time I checked less than 1% of crimes committed in this country involved an assault rifle.
The roof is leaking, the water pipes are broken and the furnace doesn't work but DC is worried about a hinge that squeaks.
What percentage of crimes in this country are committed by illegals?
I wonder how many of those crimes included the use of a an illegally obtained fire arm?
Why focus on a weapon that is so seldom used? We have a ton of laws on the books but just like immigration laws, if not enforced they are worthless.
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.
