Gun ownership in this day and age

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sftyvlv1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes

Nowadays there are drones.

They’ll shoot you before you even have the chance to notice it.
 
Last edited:
YourNameHere said:
Easier said that done. It is different shooting at a target and shooting at a human being.
Click to expand...
So much for the scare tactic which holds that people who carry guns are trigger-happy nut jobs itching for a chance to pop a cap.
Sarcelle said:
Setting aside legalities, is it wise to bring in a weapon in spite of a spouse’s objections?

This brings us back to the original topic.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not, but I think my responses were as on topic as any.
 
Congrats, you just provided an excellent argument that people should have the right to own a tank. I completely concur with you.
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
The second amendment as a tool preventing government tyranny became irrelevant when the modern battle tank became invented.
Click to expand...
So there’s no point in equipping our soldiers with rifles? I doubt many of them would agree.

Most of the people I know would be perfectly harmless if they owned a fully geared Abrams. Harmless, that is, to anyone but a tyrant.
 
Last edited:
You don’t have to imagine how that scenario would go. We already have precedent.

Govt officials in Abrams Battle Tanks attempted to take private guns of private citizens in Waco, Texas.

The Tanks injected flammable gas throughout the building and then ignited the flammable gas, burning 76 alive inside including dozens of children in a nursery.
 
Our soldiers are backed up by our tanks and planes.

It’s not like the infantry gets sent to the battlefield without back-up forces.
 
Sarcelle said:
Our soldiers are backed up by our tanks and planes.

It’s not like the infantry gets sent to the battlefield without back-up forces.
Click to expand...
Vonsalza said:
A citizen isn’t a professional soldier.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter. Small arms are vital to the operation of our armed forces, and the Second Amendment recognizes the right and duty of citizens to own the same small arms that are in common use by the military.

But again, this is off-topic. It’s time to end the derailment of the thread.
 
Last edited:
neophyte said:
40.png
Sarcelle:
Our soldiers are backed up by our tanks and planes.

It’s not like the infantry gets sent to the battlefield without back-up forces.
Click to expand...
Vonsalza said:
A citizen isn’t a professional soldier.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter. Small arms are vital to the operation of our armed forces, and the Second Amendment recognizes the right and duty of citizens to own the same small arms that are in common use by the military.
Click to expand...
The second just says “arms”. Any limitation is arbitrary and must be defended.

I personally think the second amendment should only guarantee your right to carry bolt and lever rifles and revolver handguns.
 
Oooh, those are my favorites, and I’m pretty good with both!
But seriously, I’m not going to worry too much about fighting government forces. The only regime that would order disarmament of the American people would be a far left one. That ain’t gonna sit too well with either military or law enforcement. 😂
 
Vonsalza said:
The second just says “arms”. Any limitation is arbitrary and must be defended.
Click to expand...
That’s a very odd assertion. I suggest that you study what the founding fathers said about it, or, for example, the ruling in US v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
Vonsalza said:
I personally think the second amendment should only guarantee your right to carry bolt and lever rifles and revolver handguns.
Click to expand...
You’re entitled to your opinion.
 
neophyte said:
I suggest that you study what the founding fathers said about it…
Click to expand...
Nuclear weapons are “arms”. I’m reasonably certain they didn’t have those in mind when discoursing.

In their day, a second shot took a quarter-minute to get off. If you’d like to go back to the technological standards of that day for the common citizenry, I’m all for it.
or, for example, the ruling in US v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
Click to expand...
That shorty shotguns aren’t covered by the second?
You’re entitled to your opinion.
Click to expand...
As are we all.

The most pressing question is "What do you want to make legal for BOTH the Honest Man and the homicidal maniac, since on paper they are the same until the maniac is caught?

Since we’ve really no hope of any local rebellions actually toppling the US gov. by force, the only real reasons for firearms are hunting, self-defense and SHTF. Bolts, pumps/levers, and revolvers are serve just fine for those ends for the honest man.

The maniac, on the other hand, would find killing large volumes of people in one setting much more difficult.
 
Vonsalza said:
To my point exactly. The boys at Waco were about as “God and Guns!” as one could get.
Click to expand...
And you’re about as “God and Tanks!” as one could get.

You don’t seem self-aware to realize every post you’re making is an argument citizenry need military arms to “level the playing field” for consistency w intent of 2nd amendment
 
Last edited:
@Aquinas11
Good lord, man. Are you thinking?

Imagine how much higher the corpse count would be if the Vegas shooter had authentic military hardware!
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
That shorty shotguns aren’t covered by the second?
Click to expand...
That they aren’t, because the Court had no notice that they were in use by the military.

You didn’t study it very closely, did you. If the Court had had notice of the historical use of those guns by the military (they were indeed used to great effect in the trenches of WWI), then the ruling would have gone the other way because private ownership of military small arms is what the Second Amendment explicitly protects. The ruling in U.S. v. Miller explicitly says that.
 
Last edited:
Think is what happens when you try to rationally argue against emotion. You honestly think you’ve countered my point with the Puckle gun.

How many of that novelty got made?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top