Should private citizens have a right to own and carry an automatic machine gun? (legal, weapons)

[AnUnidentifiedMale]

I believe that Second Amendment purists would say yes, they should have that right.

[jdm2008]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

I believe that Second Amendment purists would say yes, they should have that right.

Purists could say the same about rocket launchers, grenades, even nuclear and biological weapons.

But no I don't think we should be able to carry automatic weapons.

[calipoppy]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

I believe that Second Amendment purists would say yes, they should have that right.

Why, so they can kill a ton of people more efficiently?

These types of weapons should be banned - the 2nd amendment did not intend for psychopaths to have mass killing machines.

[Little-Acorn]

Are you asking whether we should have the right to own a full-auto gun?

Or whether we DO have the right to own one?

Yes, we DO have that right. Government and other hysterical leftists are constantly trying to take the right away, but the language of the Supreme Law of the Land is clear.

SHOULD we have that right? That questions is, of course, always open to debate.

I believe we SHOULD, because society is safer if we have that right (even though most people wouldn't bother carrying one, or carrying any weapon at all), than if we don't have the right.

[Marksman84]

If the citizen in question passess a stringent background check and is properly trained/qualified on the weapon, yes. It's no different than owning a sporting, being highly proficient in a martial art, or giving a driver's license to a legally blind 90-year Floridian. In other words, owning an automatic weapon is one of many ways of being a potential hazard to society. I'm fairly certain that McDonalds and Marlboro kill more people every year than automatic weapons.

I had a BEAUTIFUL TEC-DC9 from my military days that I had to surrender thanks to a bunch of whiny, miserable anti-gun people.

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

I believe that Americans interested in obeying the law would say yes, they should have that right.

Fixed it for you.

[jdm2008]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

Are you asking whether we should have the right to own a full-auto gun?

Or whether we DO have the right to own one?

Yes, we DO have that right. Government and other hysterical leftists are constantly trying to take the right away, but the language of the Supreme Law of the Land is clear.

SHOULD we have that right? That questions is, of course, always open to debate.

I believe we SHOULD, because society is safer if we have that right (even though most people wouldn't bother carrying one, or carrying any weapon at all), than if we don't have the right.

Do you think people have the right to own more dangerous weapons, like rocket launchers, bombs, even nuclear weapons they are feasible to obtain or manufacture?

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

but the language of the Supreme Law of the Land is clear.

The language regarding fully automatic squad level weapons is hardly clear, even the most conservative members of the Court in the Heller decision left open questions about the legitimacy of owning every sort of firearm.

[jimw144]

Oh goody another Rasmussion poll.

[lionking]

Yes