So, where do you personally draw the line. . .

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Stuflames, Nov 2, 2010.

  1. Stuflames

    Stuflames New Member

    19
    0
    0
    On what weaponry civilians ought to have access to straight up?

    On what weaponry civilians can get permits to have access to?

    Just curious :D
     
  2. Stuflames

    Stuflames New Member

    19
    0
    0
    Alternatively, what civilians should not have access to works just as well, no need to list everything of course.

    Or just a personal beef, one way or the other.
     

  3. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    I think we should be able to own anything we can afford to pay for. I have an F16 on layaway right now.
     
  4. 2hot2handle

    2hot2handle New Member

    803
    0
    0
    You name it, I think you should have the right to own it. Like CA said, if you can pay the bill, you can have the thrill.
     
  5. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    I just got a recall notice for my B-2. It seems that one of the bay doors is a tad sticky. Damn Chinese made actuators! I am thinking of trading it for an F16 and a dozen claymores. Is that a good deal or is that a good deal! :D :rolleyes:
     
  6. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    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.

    I don't see limits implied in that, nor do I see where it says I have to get a permit. At least at the federal level, there should be no bans whatsoever. On anything.

    What individual states do is another matter.
     
  7. cpttango30

    cpttango30 New Member

    13,934
    4
    0
    Like the others. If you can pay you can play.

    People own P-51 mustangs why can't someone buy a F-16 or F/A-18?

    Me I am not picky I want an RPG and 30 or 40 cases of ammo for it. Them deer are getting mighty big.
     
  8. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    I draw the line a lot shorter than the responses so far.

    I don't have a problem with privately owned F-16's or B-2's it's the munitions that do the damage not the aircraft, I do have a problem with privately owned chemical weapons such as nerve gas. I also take issue with my neighbor having a nuclear weapon, but I don't care if he has a huge arsenal of fully automatic weapons and body armor.

    I can't put my line in concrete terms but the overall idea is that if it can only be used to attack and will cause very large scale damage, I'm fine with banning those from private ownership. Partly because if you don't accept some limitations on the 2A you will push away the moderates and will end up with a constitutional amendment repealing 2A.
     
  9. c3shooter

    c3shooter Administrator Staff Member

    21,447
    562
    113
    Where do I draw the line? NBC warfare. For the puzzled- Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical. If my neighbor has a 75mm Pack Howitzer that he likes to shoot of the 4th of July, so what? May come in handy in a zombie attack.

    The citizen should have access to the same weapons as the military of his country, In Switzerland, they do. For some strange reason, not a problem.

    People with a demonstrated history of mental incompetence or violent criminal behavior should have access to slingshots.

    And food for thought- the B-52s, and the W-31 nukes, the aircraft carrier and the 155 howitzers, the M2 50 cal Brownings, and the M16s- are all under the control of people that one day will become civilians again. Does that make them untrustworthy for some reason?
     
  10. Sh00tnButt

    Sh00tnButt New Member

    32
    0
    0
    i am for the permit check ..
    the BG's have lot's of money to buy weapons .. if we don't have some sort of checks & balances then we are all in danger of losing the "2nd Amendment" .. i am all for the honest citizen owning whatever they can afford .. but, what about the guy next door who was not so law abiding? .. do you think he should be able to get what he want's by making it easier for him? .. what is he going to do with it? .. he might just blow your house up just because you pissed him off about something .. the person with a permit most likely would not do that .. although a drivers license is a privilege not a right like the "2nd Amendment", would you want some nut who didn't respect others driving a car? .. sure he can afford to buy it, but does he use it responsibly as you or i? .. i recognize the down side to this but there has to be some sort of checks & balances ..
     
  11. Yunus

    Yunus New Member

    5,250
    0
    0
    Why does a permit make a person more or less likely to commit a crime?
     
  12. Jo da Plumbr

    Jo da Plumbr New Member

    4,492
    0
    0
    A permit would hopefully exclude convicted felons from gun ownership. I think they are more likely to use a gun to commit a crime.
     
  13. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    Criminals don't care about laws, period.
     
  14. Benning Boy

    Benning Boy New Member

    9,624
    1
    0
    Just curious, where does the OP draw the line?
     
  15. Jo da Plumbr

    Jo da Plumbr New Member

    4,492
    0
    0
    That is very true Skull.

    I have to say I am glad the Gang Bangers here in LA do not have fully automatic weapons. I also realize the only reason they don't have them is because they are not available to me either. So I am OK with not having RPGs and hand grenades in my local Wal-Mart, because this place is enough of a war zone.
     
  16. BigByrd47119

    BigByrd47119 New Member

    3,426
    0
    0
    When asked if I would rather every human have a gun, or absolutly no one have a gun, I would certainly say everyone have a gun. And I do mean every human.

    The reason is simple really. Gun ownership becomes self regulating. If everyone in the McDonalds has a M16 slung over their shoulder, and a guy walks in and decides today is the day to waste as many people as possible, how many shots is he really going to get off before hes blown to pieces. Not many.

    If everyone has a gun, the ones who shouldnt have a gun will be weeded out.
     
  17. Troy Michalik

    Troy Michalik Is it Friday yet? Supporter

    2,455
    1
    0
    Didn't the founders of this great nation have access to the same weapons the British did?

    An armed society is a polite society. Amen?

    And what about the guy next door that is not so law abiding? Do you think he's not going to get whatever he wants just because someone tries to hand him a form?
     
  18. kenhesr

    kenhesr New Member

    347
    0
    0
    I don't think I should be allowed to have WMDs, just my opinion, but I'm up for just about anything else. Since I'm talking about an ideal situation, (hypothetical) lets make this nation wide too. I'm a US citizen first, I just happen to live in a state second.

    How as an American can my legal weapon in one state, be illegal in another. Never could figure that one out? Too much power to the little old ladies and weenies in control of places like Ca. I've always wanted to pick up an old pig to play with, sorta liked them when I had to use one, the older I get the more I want one. Can't have one in my state, I can in the state next door, WHY!!??

    I'd say if you can push, pull, drag, fly, carry or drive it to the Knob Creek shoot, it should be legal anywhere in this country with no more paperwork than a .22 pistol.

    It'll never happen, but wouldn't it be nice to have one of these just down the street!

    [​IMG]
     
  19. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    Violent felons should be hanged. We used to do that in this country. That solves the permit problem, doesn't it?

    In New York State, if I pick up an unloaded handgun without having a handgun permit I become an instant felon on a gun-related charge. Should I be hanged? Or is the gun law fargin' stupid?
     
  20. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    I'd rather have a neighbor I trust with a nuke in his garage than a deranged son-of-a-***** who hates my guts with a .22. But I digress.

    Would you rather see the military might of this nation rest with the government or with the people?

    How 'bout this: States store WMD of every sort, securely and responsibly, as part of the militia's (people's) ordnance. The feds may ask politely for us to use them. Crazy concept, eh? That's how it used to work.