I (for the 500 millionth time), do not have a problem with the citizenry having guns. I do, however, have a problem with any and all being allowed to have guns, and there be no accountability for carelessness. You want a gun? Go ahead. But I believe you better know how to use it, and be prepared for consequences if you are careless in either it's use or storage. I believe that assault weapons are wholly impractical for a "regular" citizen. I believe that (as HHSDad once proposed), a national ballistics registry is appropriate. I also believe that unlike Nazi Germany, our country's governmental checks and balance system makes it unlikely anything near what happened in Germany would happen again. I believe it's pushing the limits of credibility to say "Better safe than sorry", relative to such a fear in this day and age.

Define "assault weapons."

 

I know you have no problem with someone owning a gun, but you also think gun registration is OK. That is the beginning of the end of gun ownership.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

I love that the whole amendment is never used by the NRA types. I am all for law-abiding citizens owning guns, but the whole amendment is about a militia and that is now the National Guard.

Anyone familiar with the principles upon which this country was founded and upon which it has operated for the last two centuries will recognize that in America, rights, by definition, belong to individuals. The Constitution and Bill of Rights repeatedly refer to the "rights" of the people and to the "powers" of government.

Samuel Adams warned that "The said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

HHSDAD If they have volunteered for the Armed Services in the last 5-6 Years.. They know they will be going to the Middle East.....

 

It's not a matter of WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.... They signed up to defend there country and thats what there being called to do....

 

 

 

BTW, Normal American Citizens Do Not Need Assult Rifles... I agree and think that a tighter ban needs to be applied on them.... There are no Milita's Nowadays UNLESS it's Radical Group(s) Taliban, Domestic Terrorist....:scared::eek:

 

Why and with good reason(s) do Americans need Fully Automatic Weapons????

:creepy:

You are talking about a machine gun here. These may not be owned by civilians without a Class III license, unless the firearm has been certified de-commissioned (rendered totally unable to fire or capable of being rebuilt to fire).

 

As I said earlier to RM, define "assault weapons."

Anyone familiar with the principles upon which this country was founded and upon which it has operated for the last two centuries will recognize that in America, rights, by definition, belong to individuals. The Constitution and Bill of Rights repeatedly refer to the "rights" of the people and to the "powers" of government.

Samuel Adams warned that "The said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

GOOD POST !

There are some that say : yea but that was a long time ago and dosen't really apply to modern day ! They think it's ok to "just change it"! Boy if that ever happens those people will see what real crime is ! They actually beleive you can buy a firearm at a gun show without a background check ! Also think assault weapons are more deadly than a "deer rifle". Think assault weapons are "fully automatic" ! Because they hear it on the news from people like Hillary. Clueless !!

HHSDAD If they have volunteered for the Armed Services in the last 5-6 Years.. They know they will be going to the Middle East.....

 

It's not a matter of WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.... They signed up to defend there country and thats what there being called to do....

 

 

 

BTW, Normal American Citizens Do Not Need Assult Rifles... I agree and think that a tighter ban needs to be applied on them.... There are no Milita's Nowadays UNLESS it's Radical Group(s) Taliban, Domestic Terrorist....:scared::eek:

 

Why and with good reason(s) do Americans need Fully Automatic Weapons????

:creepy:

Great post! :thumb:

You are talking about a machine gun here. These may not be owned by civilians without a Class III license, unless the firearm has been certified de-commissioned (rendered totally unable to fire or capable of being rebuilt to fire).

And of course no one would even think of cheating on that.

Great post! :thumb:

Break down for the rest of us, why this is a great post.

Break down for the rest of us, why this is a great post.

What took you so dang long!

And of course no one would even think of cheating on that.

Just how are they going to do that?

What took you so dang long!

Was watching a movie.

Seriously though, for openers, describe for me an assault weapon.

Was watching a movie.

Seriously though, for openers, describe for me an assault weapon.

No tanks.

No tanks.

Interesting. So, how can you base anything about one if you yourself have no definition?

 

 

I'll help out here for the benifit of those that really don't know.

 

Assault weapon is a meaningless term invented by the anti-gun movement to demonize any firearm which they consider ugly. There is no accepted definition of this term. A number of municipalities (such as and including Denver) and states (including California) have attempted to define the term, but have been unsuccessful in doing so, without also outlawing a number of perfectly legitimate hunting rifles which are functionally identical in all regards. Some have attempted to do so by banning specific firearms, and this was done with the Denver ordinance. The Denver ordinance was not based on any scientific or engineering criteria, but simply by picking “ugly” guns out of a catalog. As a result, certain firearms are illegal in Denver, but identical models of different calibers are perfectly legal. There is no rhyme or reason to their bannings, and it even includes at least one single-shot bolt-action rifle! Rifles commonly used across the State of Colorado for varmint hunting, medium-game hunting, and high-power competition are banned in Denver. The California “Assault-Weapons” Bill was an example of banning by specifying specific firearms as being “assault weapons,” but the law was recently invalidated by the courts, as the statute was determined to be unconstitutionally vague. Again, in this instance, there was no functional difference between the banned firearms and conventional hunting rifles.

I think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

Interesting. So, how can you base anything about one if you yourself have no definition?

I have one. It just doesn't happen to be your model.

I think semi-automatic weapons should be banned.

Oh good Lord.

So all hunting riffles should be baned. Why?