[trip286]

Originally Posted by danolator

Wow. I had no idea tree were so many Haters on this forum. Glad I had other things to do all day. Also glad there are other areas here where I can only talk about guns. It's sad to see

can't have different points of view on this thread.

Okay. Does anyone else notice this part? Just what the hell are you, really?

[vincent]

Originally Posted by trip286

Okay. Does anyone else notice this part? Just what the hell are you, really?

He's your buddy shoobee's kid cousin...

[axxe55]

Originally Posted by vincent

If you had phrased your points differently you would have been met with much more accommodation...you did not. Instead of going on a gun forum and stating that you support gun bans, you could have said..."why would you want to own a FA gun? I just don't see the need personally"... again...you chose not to.

You gave false statements, presented us with liberal laced gun owner bigotry and VERY un-American ideals and then complain about all the "haters". You said what you said, own it, maybe even expand on it a bit instead of doing yet another "drive by" post, like you seem to do. Grow up kid.

I'll "behoove" you...you say you fight for the 2A for a living...in exactly what capacity??? Please enlighten us. You dont' throw around statements like that without backing them up, doing that makes you look like a troll.

If people like you are fighting for our 2A rights, it's no wonder we're in such trouble...

i will add to Vincent's post with this. if you are fighting for 2nd admendment rights, then please stop as we don't need a hindrance to the defence such as yourself. i see you more as a traitor than fighter when you make such statements as to be in support of any type of ban on any type of firearm.

my father who is a lifetime NRA have had discussions about bans and restrictions and though he has no desire for certain types of firearms, supports the rights of others their choices of firearms. he also believes that bans and restrictions of any type only hinders the law abiding gun owner and also creates the steps needed to ban any and all firearms at sometime in the future.

[Tackleberry1]

Originally Posted by FatTire

Please don't do that. If enough people held that policy, manufacturers might stop making CA legal guns. Scary thought.

Or...Manufacturers would wise up and ONLY sell civilian legal products to the states Gestapo forces. Making Government goons live with same BS regs we have to put up with is the point of this exercise.

Don't care how big a Gov contract is, guarantee it's no more than 20% of any firms business. Threaten to cut off the other 80% and sales of non civi approved weapons to our keepers would come to a screeching halt.

Tack

[Chandler51]

Originally Posted by Tackleberry1

Or...Manufacturers would wise up and ONLY sell civilian legal products to the states Gestapo forces. Making Government goons live with same BS regs we have to put up with is the point of this exercise.

Don't care how big a Gov contract is, guarantee it's no more than 20% of any firms business. Threaten to cut off the other 80% and sales of non civi approved weapons to our keepers would come to a screeching halt.

Tack

I think that's what the Founders intended....for the elected officials to be "citizen servants", and live under and subject to the very laws that they pass. Instead, we have this bloated bastardization we call a government today.

[Tackleberry1]

Originally Posted by andyfromlyle

I've always said the only weapons that should be banned are WMDs (nuclear, chemical & biological). As for fully auto I know criminals have then. I was once offered a select fire beautiful rifle manufactured in the 90s, with a fully auto pistol for $1000 bucks. I passed this deal up because I knew it was totally illegal. I asked about quantities and they told me I could get a price break for 10 plus sets of rifles and pistols. Criminals can and do get full auto weapons. Luckily they usually only use these arsenals on each other. The sellers were a cousins family that I haven't seen since. My cousin told me prices have gone up, but his family still runs around the nation selling firearms.

As for banning weapons, it's always seemed idiotic to me. If a person wanted to cause the most damage they would use a long distance rifle, like a bolt action 308. Or a semi auto rifle for close encounters. I've always heard a full auto is only good for wasting ammo and keeping people's heads down. A 1 round 1 kill mentality is much more frightening than a full auto spray mentality in my opinion.

Infantry motto is "1 shot 1 kill" however, fire and maneuver tactics require the use of suppressive fire and fire superiority. It's awfully hard to achieve this with semi autos when the other side has the "Rock N Roll" switch.

Tack

[Durangokid]

The control of Machine Guns was enacted in 1934. This was not a Ban but a control. SCOTUS has ruled weapons used by a militia are legal to own. The laws of 1934 banned SBR and Sawed off shotguns. The court ruled these were not militia weapons and could be controled. These laws were passed during the Roaring years of crime before WWII. Before these laws were passed anyone could own a machine gun an SBR or Sawed off. The Liberals took advantage of the crime caused by Prohibition and a bad economy to pass these laws. Facts were the Dillingers, Bonnie & Clyde types stole their weapons from Police and Nat'l Guard armorys. The strong anti German feeling allowed the passage of the laws on Shoulder stocks for handguns. These laws were passed during th dark ages of American Law. They were passed during a time of national hardship and fear. Why do we have these rules today?

[Tackleberry1]

Originally Posted by Chandler51

I think that's what the Founders intended....for the elected officials to be "citizen servants", and live under and subject to the very laws that they pass. Instead, we have this bloated bastardization we call a government today.

Exactly Chandler thank you...I knew there was a reason I liked you.

Quick history lesson for our younger enthusiasts. Prior to WWII the Indian Motorcycle Company was the worlds premier builder of 2 wheeled joy. At the time Harley Davidson existed but they were the bike purchased by those who could not afford a real bike, The Indian. Being the best ensured Indian received the military motorcycle contract for the US Armed forces. As will all manufacturers, Indian could not meet 100% of the demand and Harley did fill some of the gaps by also building for the cause.

The big difference in the two companies was that Indian focused soley on production for the military and ignored the civilian market while Harley, no beter positioned to build civi bikes because all metal was going to military use, was smart enough to market there brand, there clothing, there helmets, Ect, Ect, knowing full well that hundreds of thousands of GI's who never saw a bike before the war would return home with exposure to themand a passion to own one.

Post War Harley sales soared and Indian died once the government cheese stopped flowing. Poor Indian...BS, they ignored the civilian market and paid the price.

Gun manufacturers would not make thaw same mistake and would buckle to "Goose and Gander" if 50% of American Gun Buyers were on board.

Tack

[Chandler51]

Originally Posted by Tackleberry1

Exactly Chandler thank you...I knew there was a reason I liked you.

Quick history lesson for our younger enthusiasts. Prior to WWII the Indian Motorcycle Company was the worlds premier builder of 2 wheeled joy. At the time Harley Davidson existed but they were the bike purchased by those who could not afford a real bike, The Indian. Being the best ensured Indian received the military motorcycle contract for the US Armed forces. As will all manufacturers, Indian could not meet 100% of the demand and Harley did fill some of the gaps by also building for the cause.

The big difference in the two companies was that Indian focused soley on production for the military and ignored the civilian market while Harley, no beter positioned to build civi bikes because all metal was going to military use, was smart enough to market there brand, there clothing, there helmets, Ect, Ect, knowing full well that hundreds of thousands of GI's who never saw a bike before the war would return home with exposure to themand a passion to own one.

Post War Harley sales soared and Indian died once the government cheese stopped flowing. Poor Indian...BS, they ignored the civilian market and paid the price.

Gun manufacturers would not make thaw same mistake and would buckle to "Goose and Gander" if 50% of American Gun Buyers were on board.

Tack

Glad to help.

[WebleyFosbery38]

Im all for 1s1k, accurate and controlled fire and the notion that Auto fire is best used to get someone to duck. That said, It doesnt matter what I believe, what matters is what is free choice all about if it comes with so many guidelines, restrictions and few actual choices?

Drs kill people daily and that is a Pro-Choice option, its not my choice but still is a choice none the less. Banning things seems pretty ludicrous if we dont choose to ban procedures that were designed to kill. Im not trying to bring in a hot button topic to kill the discussion about Machine Guns, just pointing out that all things arent perceived the same by all but that doesnt mean they arent legal.

Things no matter how dangerous they are are not dangerous at all without malice, intent or defect. Those are punishable, being a thing is not.

I have more than one friend that could spin a Machine Gun off their lathes every week of the year, they dont. CNC programmers dont even have to have advanced machining skills, just directions. The last homegrown terrorist attack happened with a Uhaul Truck, some fertilizer and a bit of Diesel fuel and the last major attack on our soil by foreign grown terrorists was with boxcutters and Jets!

Banning Objects is an act of futility, actions not objects kill and harm individuals, they are impeachable, the object is not.

2nd supporters understand this better than most and we consistently support the vigorous prosecution and punishment of Offenders with Firearms as a real deterrent, not trying to remove anything from the table that could be considered too dangerous.

Just sayin...