• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Make the case on why new machine guns should be [W:456, 841, 899]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

haymarket said:
what "sick ideology" would that be that I am following?
Click to expand...

probably a blatant disregard of our constitutional rights. banning any class of firearm violates the 2A because the 2A is a restriction on federal government action, not a grant of rights to people who already had those rights. Thus your silly claim that since we have other firearms, its not a violation of the 2A to ban machine guns is idiotic. Your claim is based on what the people have bought which is irrelevant as to what the government cannot do
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

TurtleDude said:
perhaps-the patent on the MP 5 is long gone
Click to expand...

Well it is an old gun by now, so I could see that.

Lack of creativity still stinks a little though.

But then again, just look at all the different makers of the M16/guns like the M16.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

TurtleDude said:
translation-dishonest Dem politicians can piss on the constitution all they want and the 2A can be ignored to harass conservatives
Click to expand...

your utter contempt for the American people and the peoples government is showing not to mention your lack of knowledge about the Second Amendment if you believe for a second that machine guns are protected by it.

It is ironic that you ask for honest answers and I respond and you find that truth too hard to handle so you have to resort to over the top hyperbole and silly attacks on your political enemies.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

TurtleDude said:
probably a blatant disregard of our constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

You have no constitutional right to a machine gun. So stop with the nonsense.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


I have contempt for sheeple who are too stupid to understand what the scum bag democrats intend for the rights of gun owners

anyone who thinks an entire class of guns should be banned-guns that civilian police have and were legal for civilians for about 100 years, is contemptuous of the Constitution since the constitution does not give the government any power to ban a class of firearms
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Moderator's Warning:
There is a ton of baiting/flaming/trolling going on in this thread and it ends now. It all needs to stop, no matter how light it may be. There's a topic to this thread. Either discuss it or be removed from it. Every thread in the gun forum's topic isn't "Everything under the sun related to guns". If you feel that the new machine guns should be banned, make your case. If you feel like it shouldn't be banned, make your case. If you disagree with someone's argument on that either way then explain why. Otherwise, stop baiting and trolling this thread
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

haymarket said:
You have no constitutional right to a machine gun. So stop with the nonsense.
Click to expand...

I have a right to one that was recognized by the 2A. You said the same thing about Handguns at one time
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


The Constitution protect the right to bear arms. IT DOES NOT protect individual weapons or even categories of weapons.

But having said that,I would welcome a straight up or down vote in the Congress on legalizing machine guns for sale to citizens. I would love to see the votes on that and I would love to see just what the American people would do with those votes.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

TurtleDude said:
I have a right to one that was recognized by the 2A. You said the same thing about Handguns at one time
Click to expand...

Nope - never did. But feel free to reprint my comments.

No Constitutional right to a machine gun has every been upheld.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


A difference of opinion on a matter of public policy regarding machine guns is NOT an ideology. Since one does NOT have a Constitutional right to a machine gun there is not "blatant disregard" for the rights of that person since that right does NOT exist.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

haymarket said:
No Constitutional right to a machine gun has every been upheld.
Click to expand...

No exceptions are listed in the 2nd amendment, therefore ALL arms are protected. Period.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

blaxshep said:
No exceptions are listed in the 2nd amendment, therefore ALL arms are protected. Period.
Click to expand...

No Court decision in 225 years has ever agreed with that interpretation of the Constitution. It does NOT have to list exceptions because no specific guns are covered - only the right itself and that is independent of various individual weapons.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

haymarket said:
No Court decision in 225 years has ever agreed with that interpretation of the Constitution. It does NOT have to list exceptions because no specific guns are covered - only the right itself and that is independent of various individual weapons.
Click to expand...

Arms means all guns. Period.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

blaxshep said:
No exceptions are listed in the 2nd amendment, therefore ALL arms are protected. Period.
Click to expand...

That's not what the Supreme Court said in Heller.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

blaxshep said:
Arms means all guns. Period.
Click to expand...

Individual arms are not protected. The right to bear arms is. And that can be satisfied in a seemingly endless myriad of ways - a veritable plethora if you prefer when when certain items are taken off the menu. One cannot honestly claim they are being starved if lobster is ruled out as an option when the menu offers hundreds of other things besides lobster that can sustain and nourish.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

jet57 said:
That's not what the Supreme Court said in Heller.
Click to expand...

You are correct - that is definitely NOT what Heller said.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


For this to be true the fed would first have to be granted the authority to regulate firearms, no such authority exists in the constitution.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

blaxshep said:
Arms means all guns. Period.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't: machine guns should be banned from public distribution. I defy you to show where the 2nd Amendment means all firearms. Or a court decision that says that machine guns are okay for the public.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

jet57 said:
No it doesn't: machine guns should be banned from public distribution. I defy you to show where the 2nd Amendment means all firearms. Or a court decision that says that machine guns are okay for the public.
Click to expand...

It is on the banner to show where the constitution grants authority for the ban, it doesn't.

In fact it says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people" it is the banner's responsibility to show where the Fed is granted the power to make such a ban. It is very specific. It doesn't.

the federal government is limited to only the powers granted in the Constitution, gun regulation is NOT one of them.

"Machine guns should be banned" is not a grant of power. Want to change that there is an amendment process.
 
Last edited:
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

AJiveMan said:
****ing ridiculous, you know this person well enough to make comments like this? If you don't, there's a word for that.
Click to expand...

I know the ideology and what it produces...
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


coming from people who destroy health care plans, fight to keep the border open, violate the civil rights of the American, you have no room to make those claims...


And it is very clear, they right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned


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.
 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Luftwaffe said:
looks like a modernized super tiny rip off of the HK MP5 to me.
Click to expand...



Just ask Glock about about imitation and flattery.

The H&K was too big for a sub gun IMO, even the trigger. The Sig is more like a handgun size package made into a submachine gun. I like the Sig much better.

 
Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

blaxshep said:
For this to be true the fed would first have to be granted the authority to regulate firearms, no such authority exists in the constitution.
Click to expand...

Article I Section 8 and the Supreme COurt agrees with me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…