- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 26,629
- Reaction score
- 6,661
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
I would prefer that everyone own one of these, myself.
Back in colonial times we had sensible gun laws and ordinary people owned guns that had to be reloaded on each shot and they couldn't own guns that could fire several bullets a second. And we defeated the British army, but we need assault weapons because we have to "protect freedumb!". :lamo
This is a pontification I have been having as of late. I am not really a fire arms collector right now because I do not have the money. I do have a strong desire to collect World War I era and World War II era firearms. Do these qualify as, in your personal opinion, antique firearms? In my mind they definitely do and they are an important part of history and I would love to add some to my collection. My personal favorite is the Lee Enfield for the historical significance of this particular firearm and theaters from Afghanistan to the jungle combat to the Western front.
So how do you feel about this? Should I be able to purchase these firearms as a collector from overseas?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is a pontification I have been having as of late. I am not really a fire arms collector right now because I do not have the money. I do have a strong desire to collect World War I era and World War II era firearms. Do these qualify as, in your personal opinion, antique firearms? In my mind they definitely do and they are an important part of history and I would love to add some to my collection. My personal favorite is the Lee Enfield for the historical significance of this particular firearm and theaters from Afghanistan to the jungle combat to the Western front.
So how do you feel about this? Should I be able to purchase these firearms as a collector from overseas?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would prefer that everyone own one of these, myself.
Back in colonial times we had sensible gun laws and ordinary people owned guns that had to be reloaded on each shot and they couldn't own guns that could fire several bullets a second. And we defeated the British army, but we need assault weapons because we have to "protect freedumb!". :lamo
Of course, there were no guns which could fire several bullets a second. The technology simply didn't exist.
Not several bullets a second, but they had repeating firearms that could fire as fast as the wheel was rotated, and had dual 7 round magazines, yes literally had magazines, and one rotation loaded powder, ball, and priming powder and moved the hammer and flashpan eliminating multiple tasks.
They were used in europe almost a century prior to the revolution, even for military, but ended up losing to the musket, which you could make like 10 of for the cost of one repeater.
I would prefer that everyone own one of these, myself.
Back in colonial times we had sensible gun laws and ordinary people owned guns that had to be reloaded on each shot and they couldn't own guns that could fire several bullets a second. And we defeated the British army, but we need assault weapons because we have to "protect freedumb!". :lamo
I'm not sure if I would call ww1 and ww2 guns antique. The only antique gun I own is a winchester model 1873.
I would prefer that everyone own one of these, myself.
Back in colonial times we had sensible gun laws and ordinary people owned guns that had to be reloaded on each shot and they couldn't own guns that could fire several bullets a second. And we defeated the British army, but we need assault weapons because we have to "protect freedumb!". :lamo
Well that is the thing. They are only going to get harder to find. Why wouldn't they be antique?
This is a pontification I have been having as of late. I am not really a fire arms collector right now because I do not have the money. I do have a strong desire to collect World War I era and World War II era firearms. Do these qualify as, in your personal opinion, antique firearms? In my mind they definitely do and they are an important part of history and I would love to add some to my collection. My personal favorite is the Lee Enfield for the historical significance of this particular firearm and theaters from Afghanistan to the jungle combat to the Western front.
So how do you feel about this? Should I be able to purchase these firearms as a collector from overseas?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The term “Antique Firearm” means:
A. Any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898
Because a lot of them are still in production and/or there were tens of millions of them produced, like your lee enfield
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...arms-ammunition-gun-control-act-definitions-0
I say buy them anyway. They can be very expensive dependent upon how many were made and how many are left.
I am asking if it should be legal. Can you please give me a good reason to ban the purchase and importation of first and Second World War arms?
I am asking if it should be legal. Can you please give me a good reason to ban the purchase and importation of first and Second World War arms?
Nice statue.
I all depends on your state laws are. As much as I'd like to, you can't have a BAR in California.
Yeah, but those were hardly common or in the hands of civillians.
Well they were in the hands of civilians, but no they were not common, cost was the issue. If you could build 10 or 20 muskets to one lorenzoni repeater, and you have to arm a couple hundred thousand soldiers, the choice is obvious.
Most who got repeaters were officers, royal guards, and civilians who could afford them.
Yes you should be able to purchase those firearms regardless if they are antiques or not antiques.This is a pontification I have been having as of late. I am not really a fire arms collector right now because I do not have the money. I do have a strong desire to collect World War I era and World War II era firearms. Do these qualify as, in your personal opinion, antique firearms? In my mind they definitely do and they are an important part of history and I would love to add some to my collection. My personal favorite is the Lee Enfield for the historical significance of this particular firearm and theaters from Afghanistan to the jungle combat to the Western front.
So how do you feel about this? Should I be able to purchase these firearms as a collector from overseas?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
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?