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.
At the time of the early Republic, the people had the right to own any weapon owned by the military. All male citizens were expected to own a firearm for military (militia) service of the type in ordinary use. These days that would be a select fire weapon.
Artillery and grenades were likewise readily available (Ben Franklin actually invented an improved grenade). There's no legitimate reason for banning such weapons. Anyone who wanted to commit a crime with them could make them anyways.
How the hell can you carry an automatic machine gun discreetly?
Over your shoulder while walking at the damn shopping mall? Are you showing off? Is that the latest in paramilitary accouterments? Practicing to become a mercenary?
I think you should be able to own whatever the hell you want, but to carry in public? Hell no! You gotta draw the line somewhere, and besides when your gun is bigger than a cops - there's a problem. Flashbacks of the shootout in North Hollywood back in the late '90's. Someone must be a pretty lousy shot to need to sling an automatic machine gun over their shoulder and walk around in public. Everyone knows all it takes is ONE bullet to bring a man down, not 70. What's the target anyhow? A herd of Moose?
Don't forget that those were highly illegal and unlawfully converted! That would have been an additional felony charge with up to ten years among all the other BS, had the bastards lived!
I have the (human) right and need to urinate and defecate sometimes. Can I do either in your yard at a time of my convenience . . . errr need? Or in the street running in front of your house?
You know, I'm one of those who actually has suggested that automatic weapons be allowed. Now, about that urinating/defecating on my yard...
PS. Cool down. You probably haven't seen most of my posts. I've been playing devil's advocate in this thread, as I truly believe in... those who live by the sword, die by it. But the conservative Jeezus doesn't agree with me.
At the time of the early Republic, the people had the right to own any weapon owned by the military. All male citizens were expected to own a firearm for military (militia) service of the type in ordinary use. These days that would be a select fire weapon.
Artillery and grenades were likewise readily available (Ben Franklin actually invented an improved grenade). There's no legitimate reason for banning such weapons. Anyone who wanted to commit a crime with them could make them anyways.
Well when it comes to artillery and grenades I don't even support legal ownership without special licensing. Reason being explosives kill indiscriminate, they aren't aimed to a specific target like a firearm, bombs can damage unintended people.
I believe that Second Amendment purists would say yes, they should have that right.
The Constitution was written by humans, #1, which means it is possible for it to have flaws. #2, it was adopted in 1791, and the times (and technology) have changed. So no, they shouldn't.
The Constitution was written by humans, #1, which means it is possible for it to have flaws..
Sort of interesting because the military, police and politicians are humans therefore sometimes flawed also. Which why I ask why do people say they are to be the only ones trust worthy with power and weapons?
Which brings me to another question. Sterotyped, liberals trust only the politicians, police and military with automatic weapons yet don't trust or support the military when they use them in war? How often do "liberals" point out supposed "crimes by troops" in war, like Iraq?
If people want to sure. Why not? Because an automatic rifle allows for repeating fire? So does a semi-automatic, you just have to press the trigger each time. Not a big flipping deal. Some people can even fire single action revolvers pretty rapidly with practice.
Well when it comes to artillery and grenades I don't even support legal ownership without special licensing. Reason being explosives kill indiscriminate, they aren't aimed to a specific target like a firearm, bombs can damage unintended people.
IMO ,the best parallelism of people & guns I can make,is to pilots & airplanes...
Both pilots & airplanes are checked & regulated.
Flying is the safest way of transportation,all people like pilots & airplanes...
We should not become a cast .
We,the 4.3m of NRA & the 1.5% of adults who carry,agree with each other.
We need to convince the...150 million adults who...do not carry...
Can we be "popular " with them..?
Can we persuade them...
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.
That would have been an additional felony charge with up to ten years among all the other BS, had the bastards lived!
