- Joined
- May 22, 2012
- Messages
- 104,517
- Reaction score
- 67,888
- Location
- Uhland, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
my bright line common sense view-if civilian cops can use it in CIVILIAN neighborhoods, etc, than lawful CIVILIANS ought to be able to own the same or similar firearms in their homes for lawful use in emergencies or on proper ranges etc
Any gun the liberal democrats don't like.
my bright line common sense view-if civilian cops can use it in CIVILIAN neighborhoods, etc, than lawful CIVILIANS ought to be able to own the same or similar firearms in their homes for lawful use in emergencies or on proper ranges etc
Too bad so many people want to restrict that right to people who wish to live in an environment that allows for owning many of the firearms we see people trying to outlaw
Um, ok.
Which weapons, and why those specific weapons?
I hope so. Their last one was a mess, did a piss poor job, which resulted in every state having to set their own deal...
Unless, of course, that upsets some folks and they run to a judge to get that law deemed unconstitutional.
But what is being defined? There are multiple laws, from the defunct federal ban to multiple state laws. None are quite the same. So what is the concept, the idea, behind the bans, and do the definitions make any sense in that regard? I’m not seeing it
Like Segregation?
No need to I live in a country that was smart enough to put in its constitution limits on the government restricting what they fear. But you and those afraid of gun are free to leave. A private island is free, last owner supposedly hung himselfCheer up - you can always find your own island.
No need to I live in a country that was smart enough to put in its constitution limits on the government restricting what they fear. But you and those afraid of gun are free to leave. A private island is free, last owner supposedly hung himself
I'm not afraid of ban, just think it's stupid and recognize those pushing for one are afraid of certian guns.I am not the one afraid of an assault weapons ban. I would welcome it. There is no reason for me to leave as the majority will prevail.
so you consider all guns to be assault weapons?
The weapons of war that most people want banned.
We need a national law that applies everywhere in the USA.
Well there was no challenge to the last assault weapons ban.
That eliminates everything but muzzleloaders. It doesn't take particular skill to fire 1 shot every 5 seconds even with a single shot pistol or rifle.
I am not particularly skilled with my revolver, but I can certainly fire more than 12 shots in a minute, even without a speedloader. You're making a qualitative judgement which cannot possibly be true for all ciRcumstances.
So now you've eliminated even muzzleloader rifles
You already eliminated all handguns a with your 12 shots/minute rule.
Oh I'm sure there are experts that would just love to. California Sen. Kevin De Leon for one. Of ghost gun fame. In other words politicians that don't know the muzzle from the butt plate.=haymarket;1070492771]Are there not experts in this matter who will write the definitions into the bill?
Well he does seem to be more informed then they are.When you get before the SCOTUS be sure to point that out to them.
Awww...well that's too bad. Thoughts and prayers. The general point stands. Limit the number of rounds that can be fired to a reasonable amount. Limit the effectiveness at a distance. Make it hard to sneak them into places.
Oh I'm sure there are experts that would just love to. California Sen. Kevin De Leon for one. Of ghost gun fame. In other words politicians that don't know the muzzle from the butt plate.
With a lot of fiddling around trying to reload you might get there. If you'd like to push it to 16 I'm not super worried.12 rounds per minute?
A bolt action can do that.
And many a hunter shoots longer than 100 yards.
Those who dislike guns and see gun control laws as a political weapon, really aren't ones who can define reasonable. If Police officers have magazines of 15-20-30 rounds, that amount is reasonable for law abiding citizens.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?