"Assault Weapons" - Yay or Nay?

[BOX]

After being a resident of Montana for 6 months, which for me will be August 19th.

I'm pretty sure I can walk into a store and buy some guns. About as easily as someone from Connecticut walking into a store can buy some beer.

[HeavyMetal]

but it's my truthful answer to the question asked....

But for me to ensure that my personal liberty and most basic right to life, is never infringed upon by anyone.

"its my right" will suffice

[Buffalo Phil]

After being a resident of Montana for 6 months, which for me will be August 19th.

I'm pretty sure I can walk into a store and buy some guns. About as easily as someone from Connecticut walking into a store can buy some beer.

If you have a pistol permit, buying a gun is CT is about as easy as buying beer in CT...

HINT HINT WINK WINK NOD NOD SHOVE SHOVE COUGH COUGH HURM.

[bucketokarma]

If you have a pistol permit, buying a gun is CT is about as easy as buying beer in CT...

HINT HINT WINK WINK NOD NOD SHOVE SHOVE COUGH COUGH HURM.

... a lot of beer.

[bucketokarma]

One that's more important than all:

To ensure that no person or government, regardless of their motivations, can ever take my freedom away from me.

Yea, i Tommy Jeff'ed it. But why not?? That's the number 1 reason the first amendment exsists in the first place. Not to hunt for food. Not to shoot for fun. But for me to ensure that my personal liberty and most basic right to life, is never infringed upon by anyone.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I thank GOD ALMIGHTY on highest, that the first amendment wasn't for hunting our food!

Had to.

[Nick]

So far we have:

1. To fight "bad guys," whatever that means
2. Tommy Jeff-ism

Well done SiS

[bucketokarma]

Should Americans be allowed to drive cars?

I don't want anybody saying "yes" simply because they need to get from point A to point B, or because they like to drive. GO:

[Nick]

That is so witty and totally comparable

Should Americans be allowed to drive cars?

I don't want anybody saying "yes" simply because they need to get from point A to point B, or because they like to drive. GO:

So far no one has said why they actually need one, so your first witticism is non applicable

Secondly, since when is "liking to do something" a reasonable response, if that was the case, we wouldn't have laws since for everything that has been made illegal, there's probably someone who liked doing it.

This thread answered point of the original post, i.e., I wanted to see if SiS would react like those people in the facebook thread, I wasn't looking for a particular response. Anytime the legality of certain firearms is brought up people go to the extreme of one side or the other, post nothing in actual defense of their position, and proceed to get upset/offended throughout the course of the discussion. People either say, "it should be allowed because i want it" or, "it should be illegal because i hate it." This turned out JUST like that facebook comment thread, so its not an issue with SiS, or facebook, just with people's general attitudes towards certain topics.

Just to repeat myself again, I really have no position on the topic, its generally irrelevant to me either way. I'd be all for letting everyone have as many guns as they want, what difference does it make...so long as they're Ruger made, but thats for certain selfish reasons.

[hoggie101]

That is so witty and totally comparable



So far no one has said why they actually need one, so your first witticism is non applicable

Secondly, since when is "liking to do something" a reasonable response, if that was the case, we wouldn't have laws since for everything that has been made illegal, there's probably someone who liked doing it.

This thread answered point of the original post, i.e., I wanted to see if SiS would react like those people in the facebook thread, I wasn't looking for a particular response. Anytime the legality of certain firearms is brought up people go to the extreme of one side or the other, post nothing in actual defense of their position, and proceed to get upset/offended throughout the course of the discussion. People either say, "it should be allowed because i want it" or, "it should be illegal because i hate it." This turned out JUST like that facebook comment thread, so its not an issue with SiS, or facebook, just with people's general attitudes towards certain topics.

Just to repeat myself again, I really have no position on the topic, its generally irrelevant to me either way. I'd be all for letting everyone have as many guns as they want, what difference does it make...so long as they're Ruger made, but thats for certain selfish reasons.

Should we as Americans be allowed to wheel? Your whole statement just became invalid

[bucketokarma]

Can't delete in edit anymore?

[bucketokarma]

That is so witty and totally comparable



So far no one has said why they actually need one, so your first witticism is non applicable

Secondly, since when is "liking to do something" a reasonable response, if that was the case, we wouldn't have laws since for everything that has been made illegal, there's probably someone who liked doing it.

This thread answered point of the original post, i.e., I wanted to see if SiS would react like those people in the facebook thread, I wasn't looking for a particular response. Anytime the legality of certain firearms is brought up people go to the extreme of one side or the other, post nothing in actual defense of their position, and proceed to get upset/offended throughout the course of the discussion. People either say, "it should be allowed because i want it" or, "it should be illegal because i hate it." This turned out JUST like that facebook comment thread, so its not an issue with SiS, or facebook, just with people's general attitudes towards certain topics.

Just to repeat myself again, I really have no position on the topic, its generally irrelevant to me either way. I'd be all for letting everyone have as many guns as they want, what difference does it make...so long as they're Ruger made, but thats for certain selfish reasons.

You just live to be contrary don't you?

Okay, fact of the matter is, no, Americans do not "NEED" assault weapons. Of course Americans don't NEED cars, internet, freedom, jobs, politicians, air conditioning, and a whole slew of other things that we just simply take for granted (well, many Americans aren't taking their jobs for granted right now).

All you really NEED is your body, food, air, and water.

Enough of the semantics.

I voted yes simply because IF there is a collapse of our system, marshal law is declared, military is used against the citizens, our a foreign power comes in, the people will NEED to be able to fight back with more than just knives, improvised explosives, sticks, booby traps, pistols, cars and hunting rifles. While those all make good weapons, they are no match for any kind of organized military. Plus, if they keep whittling down and infringing upon the right to bear arms, "We The People" will be left in a position where we cannot even defined ourselves against an armed attacker. There will always be someone with a gun, even in a totally banned situation.
Somebody made an automatic weapon, it was legal to own, but then law makers and anti gun activists said there is no reason for the people to own such a destructive weapon, so they made them illegal. In this argument I'm going with, there is no legitimate reason for someone own a rifle with the capacity to hold more than ten rounds. So if they ban "hi-cap" rifles and magazines:
First off, there will be people that still have them regardless of what the law says.
Secondly, why stop there? Why should you need more than one or two shots in ANY weapon?
Heck, why would you need a firearm at all? The only thing they are good for is killing.

I am in favor of certain weapons being kept out of the hands of the masses, but I am also in favor of keeping cars away from many people as well. Hell, airplanes have been proven to be pretty dangerous weapons as well, but we aren't trying to pass laws banning air travel.

Nobody needs cigarettes, coca-cola, or hard alcohol.

Come to think of it. The situation could be much more likened to hard alcohol.

Do Americans need hard alcohol? For the sake of argument I'm going to state that "hard alcohol" is anything over 20% alc by volume.

Would prohibition have worked if they had just simply regulated HOW MUCH alcohol was allowed instead of banning it altogether? Over the years, they might have even been successful in banning everything but drinks that were less than 3% alc by volume. Although, I doubt they would have been allowed, even with small changes over time, to get away with a complete ban.

Maybe though, it seems to be working with civilian arms so far. If things go on with the whittling and consistent infringement on the citizen's right to bare arms "We The People" will be left with nothing but newly manufactured muzzle-loaders because they take more time to reload than a bolt-action they are single shot capacity, and they are inconvenient. That's if they don't outright ban firearms for all but military and police (and criminals, because you can't get them all).


I'm not trying to be funny, I just think that once they start finding ways to ban PARTS of a whole, they won't stop until they ban the entirety.

Well, that was longer and more tedious than I intended. I'm sure there are plenty of grammatical and spelling errors to discredit all that I have said without having to resort to a "that is not my opinion and therefore it is wrong" style rebuttal. I have now stated my thoughts on the issue, that is all.

Good day sir.

[Zullock Holmes]

I thank GOD ALMIGHTY on highest, that the first amendment wasn't for hunting our food!

Had to.

oooppppsss. everyone makes a mistake here and there, i know which is which.

[Nick]

2. I really don't care.

Also, its not like I'm anti-gun, or particularly care either way.

Just to repeat myself again, I really have no position on the topic, its generally irrelevant to me either way. I'd be all for letting everyone have as many guns as they want, what difference does it make...so long as they're Ruger made, but thats for certain selfish reasons.

You just live to be contrary don't you?

Yep, clearly I was being the contrarian throughout this entire thread, I'm just some high falutin' liberal who hates America.

Despite your delusions about my own personal agenda, your post was surprisingly all I was looking for from one person. Was it really that hard? It took 4 pages of me making people upset to get one adequate answer. If that's what it takes, then that's what I'll do from now on.

[Nick]

I'm sure there are plenty of grammatical and spelling errors to discredit all that I have said without having to resort to a "that is not my opinion and therefore it is wrong" style rebuttal.

Yep that's me, never giving logical thoughts and reasons to a discussion, just being a stubborn ignorant mule.

[Buffalo Phil]

Yep, clearly I was being the contrarian throughout this entire thread, I'm just some high falutin' liberal who hates America.

Despite your delusions about my own personal agenda, your post was surprisingly all I was looking for from one person. Was it really that hard? It took 4 pages of me making people upset to get one adequate answer. If that's what it takes, then that's what I'll do from now on.

I gave you 40 fucking reasons and you weren't happy. You're just being difficult.


But I'll give you a serious reply because this isn't a topic or a debate I can take seriously due to the fact that my job has me being the receiving end of every rant spewed out by my wackjob customers who thinks Obama will come to their home a personally take their guns away.

There are too many box jellyfish in this world and they need to be erraticated.