You don't get to designate 'need'. You are not the king.
You don't get to speak for God or anyone else. You only get to speak for you.
It is legal to own hand grenades.
It is legal to build and own flame throwers. I even know of a flame thrower club. That's what they do. Build and operate flame throwers as a hobby.
It is legal to own a machine gun.
It is legal to own a bump stock or to make one.
It is legal to own magazines that hold 100 rounds if you want.
It is legal to own military assault weapons. It is also legal to own non-military weapons such as the AR15 design.
Think about that if you try to take such a gun away from someone.
Who said it was?
Neither is a right. Both are restrictions on the federal government. The 2nd is also a restriction on the State governments. The 1st does not apply to State governments, only the federal government.
Argument of ignorance fallacy. I've heard quite a few say exactly that.
Wolverine (08-20-2019)
Then why do you want to ban them?
Capacity is a nonfactor. Reloading time is about 1 second. Rate of fire is limited to how fast you can pull the trigger. Ballistics is everything from throwing a rock or a baseball to 60 inch cannons.
Not everyone lives in a city home, dumbass. YOU don't get to dictate what the best weapon is to protect a home.
Guess you never heard of the sawed off shotgun, eh? A favorite weapon of the mob because they can be carry concealed.
YOU don't get to designate what a 'traditional hunting rifle' is. You are not the king.
Protecting a ranch. Protecting our Constitution. Shooting little pricks like you that want to overthrow the Constitution. Think about that.
Even the United States Army recognizes the shotgun as the premier weapon for close quarters firepower, and assigns trench guns for that tactical purpose. You basically have close to a zero percent chance of missing an intruder if you take a shot in his direction with a 12 guage. It takes a high skill level to put down a moving target on the first shot with an assault rifle. Which not only gives the intruder a chance to return fire, but the way the ballistics of the semi auto assault rifle are designed, your bullet could go through the wall of your house and into your neighbor's house. Meaning you not only missed your intended target, but you might have killed your neighbor. Those risks and tactical downsides are all negated by the shot gun.
I guess what I am saying is that only idiots think a civilian AK-47 is the supreme weapon, the best choice, for defense of home against intruder.
The bottom line here is that there is no God-given right to carry large-capacity ammunition magazines in semi-auto assault rifles. None. Nada. Zilch. That tactical set up is designed for one purpose, and one purpose only: to kill human as rapidly and efficiently as possible with a sustained rate of fire not found in other weapons on the civilian market.
I maintain you do not have a God-given right to large capacity ammo clips with assault rifles, anymore than you have a God-given right to bump stock, machine guns, or grenades.
"nineteenth-century civil rights leader Ida B. Wells noted that one of the lessons of post–Civil War America and “which every Afro American should ponder well,” is that “a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.” T. Thomas Fortune, another black civil rights activist of the era, argued that it was with a Winchester that the black man could “defend his home and children and wife.”
https://thefederalist.com/2019/01/30...can-americans/
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."
— Joe Biden on Obama.
Socialism is just the modern word for monarchy.
D.C. has become a Guild System with an hierarchy and line of accession much like the Royal Court or priestly classes.
Private citizens are perfectly able of doing a better job without "apprenticing".
Ban all guns and we will have a safer and saner country. The carnage in American and especially in schools is due to a slanted and bad interpretation of the 2nd amendment. We do not need to kill each other and do not need weapons of war in society.
wouldn't this particular claim rightfully dismiss the US v. Miller issue of short barreled shotguns not being protected by the 2nd Amendment then?
I have 6 years experience with home and military weapons of my own. the army is not the one i'd be listening to for their recommendation, and it is just that.........a recommendation.
I don't know about God given, but the 2nd Amendment has a single purpose and that is to notify the government that they have no power over our firearms. NONE!.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Earl (08-20-2019)
You do realize that the second amendment is not a restriction on citizens right? It's a restriction on the Government, any law written, that infringes in any way, is a violation of the oath Congress swore! Now does that mean I want fully automatic weapons on the street, no! Are background checks good, eh, maybe! Those only make it harder for law abiding citizens to purchase guns! Make gun crime punishments harsher, including death for murder with a gun!
Earl (08-20-2019)
Earl (08-20-2019)
Bookmarks