Assault Weapons - Ban or make them Legal?

RPG's and Bazookas arent firearms IMO, and are much harder to get. Apply the above will have/can get logic and rest assured if Scarface wants an RPG, Scarface will have an RPG. Originally Posted by CJ7

Actually, CJ7, a strict, historically accurate interpretation of the 2nd Amendment shows that it DOES include things like RPGs, Bazookas, fully-armed helicopter gunships, and tanks.

During the Revolutionary War, the privateers were privately-owned ships, armed by their owners, sent out with government-issued letters of marque and reprisal, to raise hell with British shipping and men'o'war.

During the Revolutionary War, the cannons, crew-served weapons firing HEAVY projectiles, having no use whatsoever for hunting or personal defense, at a time when both were routine uses of firearms in daily life, were privately owned.

The Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights specifically because the people demanded it. They wanted to be sure that they COULD fight another Revolution, if they had to do so.

I think the whole ban issue is BS designed to make people think that they are accomplishing something when in reality it makes no difference. I believe that to possess a fully automatic rifle takes a lot of permits today and is not easy. If a person has the money and desire to do that so they can blow the hell out of targets more power to them. For all the complaints about semi automatic weapons that look like fully automatic weapons people are not thinking. There is no difference in functionality between a fancied up semi automatic rifle and a semi automatic hunting rifle. If you ban one then they will just buy the other. No impact other than people feeling good about themselves because they did something useless.

Oh Randy you have issues. Is penis envy one of them? I wondered why you brought up my dick in this discussion. Do you envy those of us with a dick twice as large as your own?
I do not normally suggest that you seek help for your mental issues but with all the nut jobs that have been running around acting the fool, I really am worried about you or actually about anyone in your near vicinity. Please don't go to any Batman movies or Sikh temples.

I wish I could discuss this idea of what the 2nc amendment means but you seem to have some real issues with individual freedom and liberty and have falsely accused me of violating a federal law which is not right.

As far as the intended use of the firearms that I own, each is designed for firing a projectile to strike an intended target. It would be up t the individual to determine within his moral compass what they wanted to fire at. Unfortunately there are those, which I fear are similar to yourself, that make their intended targets people. To fail to acknowledge that each of my firearms have the capability of inflicting mortal damage shoud I as a person use a firearm in that manner would be foolish. Not a single one of my firearms is capable of taking anyone's life without the direction of the operator.

Anyone that would not properly train themselves in the proper use and safety of a firearm is not being very responsible. I really don't think that a mandatory course should be required. You do not have to have a mandatory course to get a drivers license, all you have to do is pass a simple test that can be passed with little more knowledge than simple common sense.

So you are in favor of the government controlling what you can or cannot buy, when you can buy, where you can buy it and should have to register that you own it with the government. From you this is not surprising.

Now back to your penis envy and need to express it on a SHMB. Don't worry about the size of your dick, nobody really cares

Oh Randy you have issues. Is penis envy one of them? I wondered why you brought up my dick in this discussion. Do you envy those of us with a dick twice as large as your own?
I do not normally suggest that you seek help for your mental issues but with all the nut jobs that have been running around acting the fool, I really am worried about you or actually about anyone in your near vicinity. Please don't go to any Batman movies or Sikh temples.

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

you have to forgive candyforlittlegirls, he went to ou

You have to forgive Randy cakes. He saw everything that has been written and he has no answer so he resorts to grade school tactics.

It is legal to own a fully automatic weapon. Only if you go through an FBI background check and a local LE check. You have to pay for a license and you have to stay in control of the weapon at all times. Local law enforcement can come to your home at any time and ask to see the weapon (s) in question. If they are not properly secured in the agreed upon place they can revoke your license on the spot.
So you have to have a clean record, a gun safe or safe room, and you must keep control of the weapon.

During the Civil War many private citizens created their own units including cannon batteries.

Since no one has brought it up I will put out what the government considered an assault weapon in 1994.
Any weapon that possesses any of the following capabilities;

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Bayonet mount
• Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
• Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those which are mounted externally).
• Variants, Has ever been produced in any variant for fully automatic fire.

Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

• Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
• Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
• Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
• Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
• A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.

Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

• Folding or telescoping stock
• Pistol grip
• Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
• Detachable magazine.

Thanks for the shopping list. I can see that I need to round out my small collection with a few more firearms.

My approach would be why would any citizen need to own an automatic assault rifle, AR-15', UZI's, Ak-47's, M-16 etc???? Those weapons have one purpose mass killings during a military battle.

Your thoughts? Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

See JD's post above, the UZI and the AR15 are not "assault rifles." To own a true assault rifle (or an UZI) in the U.S. requires a license. It's been that way since the '30s. So it is obvious that COG has homed in on the heart of the issue: "who gets to decide?" It's obvious that many in the Brady crowd don't know (and do not care to know) about the laws already in place. Furthermore, most in the Brady crowd cannot intelligently discern the substantive differences between weapons, e.g., just listen to the idiots in the MSM, they just want to carte blanche ban all weapons.

BTW, I've had extensive training with the M2HB, .50 cal machine gun, but I do not own or care to own one. They're too damned expensive to shoot at about $3 per round and about 600 rounds per minute.

This is a MAK-90

Is it an assault weapon?

No, it is not an assault weapon. It has a detachable magazine and is semi-automatic but it does not have a pistol grip or a bayonet lug. The stock does not fold and the MAK90 has never been made as an automatic weapon.

Is this M1 Garand an assault weapon?

Yes it is according to the Assault weapons bill. It is semi-automatic, has a bayonet lug, and though never put in large production, there were some built as fully automatic. Three strikes and you're done.

To think a weapon needs to be fully automatic to be a assault weapon is delusional

Assault weapons??? There really is no such thing. Depending on how a weapon is used would determine that factor. I consider mine defensive weapons. If we keep allowing more and more restrictions, before long rubber bands will be outlawed. It's not a hunting issue and I hate to keep hearing that being part of the equation. Though I have used my AK with 30 round magazine to get a dear........it only took one bullet.
Next they will be wanting to tell us the size of our weapon. I love shooting my DE...50AE

Some interesting information about the subject
www.mercyseat.net/gun_genocide.html

All that must be fiction though, can't be true.
No government would do that to it's people.

Government is always good, so more government
must be even better.

Besides, even if it is true, it's a lovely day for a Genocide.

Someone start the Marshal Music.

But, but, but, not all governments killed off their people when they took away their guns....yet.

What about how much violent crimes go down once law abiding citizens no longer have firearms?
Mexico has strong gun control laws and they don't have a problem with firearm violence...uh wait yeah they kinda do and they don't get them from law abiding sources either.

You know gun control isn't how the liberals commit their genocide, they do it via eugenics and abortion.

You never know when the zombies are gonna come along ....

You never know when the zombies are gonna come along .... Originally Posted by SkylarCruzWantsYou

That just made me laugh out loud. We all gots to get prepared. As to the post previous to yours, a woman's right to choose compared to genocide. Now, I've heard it all.

That just made me laugh out loud. We all gots to get prepared. As to the post previous to yours, a woman's right to choose compared to genocide. Now, I've heard it all. Originally Posted by Annef

Adolf's right to choose

Mau's right to choose

Stalin's right to choose

Just to name a few.
So many choices we have. What a wonderful world it is.