People who think that some guns should be legal (like the AR-15), where and how do you draw the line? You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
>pic related, is not legal for civilian use
>>77636669
Let it happen my man, it fuels the flame of the collapse of Civilization. We're marching towards Tribalism, there is no political solution, the laws here today won't be around in five years, the concept of Statism in all it's forms will be gone.
>>77636669
You talk like a faggot
>>77636669
>not legal for civilian use
Why not?
Seems like hours of fun.
>>77636669
I draw the line at "bearable" weapons. No one else seems to agree, which is fair enough. And no that doesn't include what the government refers to as "Destructive devices" i.e. explosives.
Also you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.
>>77636943
There should definitely be a mandatory background check for light artillery.
>>77636904
now that i go back and reread that it looks like a reddit post - just answer the fucking question.
>>77636669
People who want guns in the hands of civilians are stupid.
all semi autos should be banned. These guns can fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. They're people killing machines.
>>77636669
make full auto weapons legal
bump NFA regulations up to RPGs, mines, grenades, etc
>>77636943
someone could literally take out an entire building with one of those things - easily
>>77636669
SHALL
>>77637128
is that what you did in sudan - how did that work out for you? when was the last day you guys went without some warlord kidnapping 500 kids or blowing up a market in your stupid civil war
>>77637074
you must be one of the few non arab swedes left - of course you're cucked
>>77636669
>You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
heh
>>77637158
>ban fertilizer
>>77637258
i'm a deployed burger buddy calm down
>>77636669
>You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
Guess again, cakeboy.
>>77636669
http://www.mining.com/fifty-killed-in-a-knife-attack-at-a-chinese-colliery/
Fifty killed with a knife
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26402367?SThisFB
29 dead 130 injured with a knife
Take away guns and they will just use another weapon with just as much success. You are a fucking idiot if you think a gun ban will stop crime or mass killings
Only guns that are both exceptionally dangerous and rare. This is what Scalia said in Heller. The most popular rifle in America certainly does not count.
>>77637373
>ban fertilizer
see this is why i don't understand where to draw the line because you can use anything to kill someone
>>77637506
i don't support gun control - but i don't want people owning howitzers or tanks or nukes either so where do you logically draw the line without some contrived cop out
>>77637616
this it will only lead to a rise in brutal deaths that will be even more shocking
>>77637579
what defines exceptionally dangerous? Some stupid liberal would say a butter knife is and then we end up like the uk
>>77636669
If you can afford a howitzer you should be able to own a howitzer. You already can too be the way.
>>77636669
>pic related, is not legal for civilian use
If you can find a seller the only requirement to own that artillery piece is a 200 dollar tax stamp from the BATFE for a destructive device. If you want to fire anything other than solid training rounds it'll be an additional 200 dollar tax stamp for every round of ammunition containing over a quarter ounce of explosive. So it's actually entirely legal for civilian use and you don't seem to have the background of knowledge require to speak on the subject which makes me wonder what compelled you to do so.
>>77636669
You're a fucking halfwit.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_bGczFQIOc
>>77636669
The military should only be allowed to use what civilians are allowed to use, not the other way around friend.
>>77637963
fine whatever an f-22 or nuke i don't give a fuck there are illegal weapons you strawman twat
Varying amounts of paperwork and testing should enable a citizen to get any piece of military hardware they can afford. Just like the current situation.
> Can't believe I'm going to write this:
> I love the ATF.
> <3 <3 <3 /k/ desu senpai
>>77636669
u wot m8
http://www.milweb.net/classifieds/view_large.php?ad=81051&cat=6
>>77637805
Shot and stabbed?
Yeah ill take murrica. Where we only get shot OR stabbed. Not both.
>>77636669
Yes it is.
>>77637724
>i don't want people owning howitzers or tanks or nukes either so where do you logically draw the line without some contrived cop out
You could consider not being a little bitch. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2314
Or, you know, just do what everyone else does and invent contrived justifications to ban the things you don't like. (A common approach is to claim that your back-of-the-envelope cost-benefit analysis permits the things you like and prohibits the things you don't.). Or, seeing as how you're never going to be in a position where having a justification for your beliefs will make a meaningful policy difference, give up on having justification and just say that you think M240Bs ought to be legal because you like them and Sherman tanks ought to be illegal because you don't like them.
I don't know. "Tell me what to think" is not a good look.
>>77637938
you can buy an m777???
also what about actually illegal weapons if im wrong about that one
>>77638087
Way to move the goal posts and continue to demonstrate you're an ignorant faggot.
>>77636669
What do you think about all the nuclear physicists who know how to build Nuclear Weaponry?
Because they have the knowledge and access to Giga funding necessary to get Nuclear Weapons built.
Why are you not crying like a little bitch over their control over the life and death of the planet?
Why instead complain about civilians with every shittier rifles trying to hand on to a shred of parity with the government?
You do like violence and killing, don't you?
You like it when it comes with a government seal of approval.
Or you need to get your priorities straight quickly. (The government has real machine guns too, anon. Aren't you sacred of them using them on pitiful niggers and such?)
>>77638409
just correcting my mistake about the howitzer senpai
>>77637616
Fertilizer can be used to grow food to feed people, you can't feed people with an altilery piece.
>>77638435
what are you going on about?
>>77637418
Thank you for your service
>>77637805
Scalia said "dangerous and rare" which definitely means both coming from him. Butter knives aren't rare or dangerous, obviously.
>>77638264
If you can find a seller, I don't know if there are any in private hands in the US but there's no legal barrier to ownership and there are plenty of comparable pieces in private hands. I also can't think of a single weapon that is explicitly illegal for civilians to own. Even nuclear weapons are assembled and disassembled by private corporations. Hypothetically an incredibly rich individual could obtain all the regulatory permitting to own a nuclear weapon although realistically it won't happen.
>>77638604
so the qualification is
>can feed people
>>77638664
so what are there no illegal weapons or something
is the entire premise of my question flawed?
>>77638604
>you can't feed people with an altilery piece.
You can if you're sufficiently accurate and willing to experiment with your loadings a bit.
>>77638620
Your welcome.
I do need to ask for a favor though, or some info, it really seems like they REALLY are trying to push for the gungrab this time. Is that what the average person thinks?
I havent been stateside in like 5 months everything I've heard about Orlando is either on the radio or internet
>>77638766
>so what are there no illegal weapons or something
Nothing's illegal if you're an Arab oil sheik with a Swiss bank account.
F O R M A L I S M W I L L W I N
Those that defend carrying a gun around - any type of gun - are not right in the head.
>>77638604
The point of the 2nd Amendment isn't to "feed people"; it's to defend against the government, and an artillery piece handles that nicely.
The dispute is whether it can be considered a firearm and falls under such a jurisdiction.
>>77638660
still seems like a flimsy subjective standard to me from a philosophical perspective of what should and shouldn't be allowed - obviously for all practical purposes it works for now
>>77636669
as long as it isnt prohibited by international laws or treaties
>>77638806
Some republicans have warmed up to the idea. It's a travesty.
>>77636669
Howitzer's aren't illegal.
Explosive rounds are but not the gun itself.
>>77638909
international laws are the stupidest things on earth
no one follows them unless they want to because there's no enforcement besides a stern look and a slap on the wrist- and that's if you're syria.
>>77639003
okay so why are explosive rounds illegal
>>77638951
Jesus, what are they pushing for? An all out ban? I saw the "ban the AR" petition but thats okay I'm a M1 and AK guy myself but damn... guess they really are fucking going for it.
All over some raghead shithead who hated gays. Where I am, right now, they put tires around gay men and set them on fire, in the name of Islam
>>77638766
Depends how you define illegal. If you mean explicitly barred from civilian ownership under all circumstances then no I don't know of a single thing including weapons of mass destruction that are explicitly barred from being owned by anyone except the government in the US. If by illegal you mean "extremely hard to get and requires a massive amount of paperwork and money that puts it out of the reach of pretty much any individual and most corporations" then you're looking at things like weapons of mass destruction and heavy munitions.
>>77639106
They aren't.
>>77636904
And his shit's all retarded.
>>77639181
>Where I am, right now, they put tires around gay men and set them on fire, in the name of Islam
Well why don't they just ban tires?!? Seems like a no brainer to me.
In all honesty the main probably legislation is a ban on purchasing these guns if you're on a terrorist watch list, not a full out ban YET (although a bunch of people are saying they should ban it outright).
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/18/us/politics/gun-control-mass-shootings-orlando-susan-collins.html
>>77637116
implying thats not what guns are used for
>>77639231
some other guy just said they were
>>77636669
Hey I was on that gun
>>77639425
Jesus christ. Thanks based anon.
The NYDaily News is trash though, I only read the post.
>>77639530
He's wrong. An explosive round containing over a quarter ounce of explosive needs the same 200 dollar tax stamp as the gun but is entirely legal.
>>77639210
okay. so when people talk about things like voter id laws and poll taxes, these restrictions and hoops are considered hindrances to your right to vote. how are "massive amounts" of paperwork and money not unconstitutional hindrances to the right to bear arms?
>>77637418
Hey Sudan bro - we meet again. I have thought up some stories to tell tonight. Gonna green text on PC later and poast
>>77639425
and who decides who's on the terrorist watchlist?
Hell, who defines terrorist?
>>77636669
Think we need to legalize howitzers.
>>77636669
I support a full ban on assault niggers.
>>77638264
Hell yeah bro - but you're gonna need a team of dudes to run that thing, 155 rounds, and a bunch of fuzes
>>77639696
Because the gun grabbers won m8
>>77639718
What up dawgy dawg
Sweet. Bored out of my mind in this fucking desert.
>>77636669
No nukes over 5 megatons. That's where the line should be drawn.
No one needs a 20 Megaton nuclear warhead
So for those of you saying how basically every weapon is legal in some sense, what about state arms bans? isn't california really anti-gun?
I want guns o be outlawed just so it causes a war, but first I need to work some shitty job until I can afford to stockpile a decent rifle and tonsa ammo.
I'm thinking I need to drop the 3k$ SCAR and just get an AR-15, that will move my time table up by an incredible amount, but the AR-15 isn't as cool.
It think it's all a ploy to de-lethalize America. Without guns we can't revolt
>>77636669
I feel like I'm the only one saying it, but I don't think price hikes have been tried.
>>77639910
Glad you made it another day broseefus
>>77636669
if you have the money you can buy a howitzer, just need a stamp
>>77640165
Only 1 IED today my friend!
>>77636669
Literally any weapon that the government can wield in our names, we should be able to own. Provided we can pay for it.
>>77636669
i don't think theres actually a law against owning an artillery piece its just defense contractors aren't allowed to sell their equipment to anyone without the DoD's approval
all things considered, a howitzer is technically a single shot rifle.
>>77638887
It might have been a cop out, to tell you the truth. I basically interpret Scalia as saying everything legal and widely used now is definitely legal. It obviously isn't a standard that can be easily applied in the future for new types of weapons.
The hard part for gun rights now is getting courts to uphold the ruling. One district actually ruled assault weapons could be banned because people were afraid of them. The Supreme Court declined to review the case.
>>77639696
They are. There's an obvious double standard when it comes to the second amendment. Also in this case a massive amount of paperwork is literally massive and subject to government approval.
I should also say I'm not advocating for private ownership of WMDs because that's incredibly absurd since they're purely strategic weapons and I also don't think that any state should maintain biological or chemical weapons. It is however worth noting that the concept of an "illegal weapon" doesn't really exist.
>>77638673
>>77638777
>>77638881
I'm sorry, I wasn't even talking regarding to that I just wanted to compare Fertilizer ban to altilery ban. Obviousely there has to be a line and I think it should be set on semiautomatic assault rifles/ single action sniper rifles below .50. Anything more military than that (full auto,. 50)and we are having a problem. Still I don't know how to implement it with what the 2nd ammendment says.
>>77636669
>You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
I FUCKIN DO
F U
you have freedom and want to give it up
are u retarded
desecrating memories on the founding fathers
filth
>>77640260
Hey there, Sudanburger. Quick question
Do you know anything about what happened at the border with Ethiopia a couple of weeks ago? I saw big causality numbers
I don't draw a line at all. The one thing I have learned about the left, is they will nickel and dime you to death on anything. Concessions only embolden them, you'll soon find yourself redrawing that line another dozen times.
>>77636669
You can't have a well regulated militia if everyone's only got hunting rifles and pistols.
>>77636669
It actually is legal with proper paperwork in most states.
>Where do you draw the line
Indiscriminate weapons, really. E.g., an artillery piece can be aimed to some degree of accuracy as could a flamethrower. A pipe bomb for the sake of self defensive is rather hard to explain. Or to make it even more absurd, owning something like a vial of smallpox for self defense.
>>77637724
But you can own a tank
>>77640537
Founding fathers? You're in fucking croatia. Don't lecture me. unless you're a proxyfag you should go back to letting 'refugees' like ahmed (age 10, pic related) trample all over zagreb
Why's that marine have an unloaded pistol in a retention holster
>>77640902
Im fckin lecturing u cause we dont have freedom and u do and u want to get rid of it
R U RETARDED?!
>Thinking artillery pieces are illegal for civilians
Nig, people have fully functioning WW2 anti-tank guns. You can go to specialty auction sites and buy fully functioning tanks.
Difference is; Non-functioning weapons/tanks are considered collectors pieces, no registration, besides maybe a license plate for your tank.
Dully functioning cannons/artillery/anti-tank guns and tanks need to be registered as Destructive Devices.
Some states Destructive Devices are illegal for civilian ownership, but most it is 100% legal.
>>77640567
Lol, oh god, that place is FUCKED.
Typical African warring bullshit. Without saying TOO much, its becoming more and more obvious that it will fall apart into a humans rights crisis that will rivals Sudans. The Eritreans have really stepped up in the human-rights-abuses department.
The Eritrea government is under heavy scrutiny and their people HATE them, so a lot of people think of the shelling/border skirmishes as more of a distraction from an impending revolution. But it will just be another failed state eventually. Rampant rapes, which here is used as a weapon of war, child soldiers, etc... we aren't really allowed anywhere close to places with child soldiers (the US government doesn't want us killing kids/many soldiers just wouldn't do it.)
It is very sad, because Ethiopia is a beautiful country with very nice people, and they will be pulled into this shit.
Just in case anyone was confused on this subject FYI
>Second Amendment
Written and intended by the Constitution (a living document) to provide the citizenry of the US the ability to defend themselves with the best military equivalent available. Period.
>Also:
Nobody in the military uses fully automatic anything aside from the M249, .50 Barrett, Mark7, and M240B. Two of these are crew serve weapons and require multiple people to operate properly and safely.
Individual service weapons are at maximum, three round burst (some exceptions in SOCOM units due to weapon choice being open).
When you see people unloading tons of rounds it's because they have the weapon on three round burst and they are quickly pulling the trigger.
Full auto is rarely used in the military because it:
>wasted ammunition
>is inaccurate
>damages the barrel of the weapon due to excessive heat
>>77641145
I assume ammo is hard to get?
so if all weapons should be legal i should be allowed to have a vial of some deadly disease that i could unleash to destroy humanity? are you guys retarded? there has to be a line- and don't just say WMD's because who defines "mass destruction" ?
>>77641385
That's a retarded comparison friend.
If the 2nd amendment was only talking about muskets, and not modern weapons, then the 1st amendment was only talking about 18th century printing presses, and not twitter, facebook, modern newspapers, websites, and 24/7 news cycles.
Here's what you do:
- Abolish the National Military
- Mandate that each individual State regulate it's own Militia (National Guard etc.). Coastal States will be responsible for Naval Defense and Anti Missile tech. Border States Will be responsible for securing the Border.
- Require all Civilians to Carry a Handgun (at minimum) at all times; legalize fully automatic weapons, and require Each Civilian have one ready to defend their Home, Town, or State from outside attack
- Regulate Explosives and Vehicle Mounted Weapons (.50 BMG, RPGs, Fighter Planes, etc) so that they are only accessible during State-Sanctioned Operations.
- Civilians 18-45 must serve One-Two years in the State Militia, then qualify on Physical fitness tests and Small-Unit tactics twice a year
- Federal Government only exists to count bundles of corn and deliver mail.
Basically Switzerland on a YUUUUGEE scale
thoughts?
>>77638264
>also what about actually illegal weapons if im wrong about that one
i don't think any weapon is technically illegal. despite the machine gun "ban", fully-automatics are still legal to own there's just a lot red tape tape that makes it practically impossible to obtain a modern one unless you're a soldier.
congress has historically skirted around the second amendment by just making the permits next to impossible to obtain.
>>77641300
They probably just make it themselves. Turning solid brass rounds is trivial compared to building a tank.
>>77638087
F-22's are legal to own, and in theory so is a nuke. However, I don't think any one has had the balls to fill out a tax stamp application for one.
>>77641441
im just carrying the debate out to its logical conclusion...really im just asking for a reasonable strong boundary line for weaponry and so far ive gotten nothing
>>77641472
Some good some bad ideas.
I agree with weapon ownership and mandatory militia service but we already have that
>all males between the ages of 17-45 are Militia
>>77641507
You'd need approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to own and store the nuclear material inside which is technically possible to receive but good luck with that one.
>>77641472
>>77641472
>Abolish the National Military
>- Mandate that each individual State regulate it's own Militia (National Guard etc.). Coastal States will be responsible for Naval Defense and Anti Missile tech. Border States Will be responsible for securing the Border.
These are retarded. The rest are good.
t. 0231 Marine
>>77641664
we don't have mandatory military service - just some dopey signup for a future possible draft
>>77641738
Yeah see here's the thing if you can fill out the paperwork for a nuke but you'll never ever be approved how can you say it is legal?
>>77639983
>needs
>>77641636
See my earlier post.
The point of the second amendment was that the citizenry should have access to and be able to use the bed military equivalent available at any time. For the most part, this is still 100% viable and legal to do.
People say fully auto is expensive. It's really not. You can modify your own weapon as long as you buy a $200 tax stamp and notify the ATF. Buying a full auto is shaking off for the sake of showing off imho
>>77641300
I know most of the people who own the Anti-tank guns spend a metric ton to get ammo, and it's stupidly rare. I think the first one that's been fired in years happened a couple years back at one of the big machine gun meets.
Tank rounds, good luck finding those.
>>77641770
If you are in between the ages of 17-45 you ARE in the militia. You have the right and moral obligation to act accordingly. Feel free to fact check me if you'd like.
>>77641472
I'll take all of that, except the first one.
biggest problem I see with that is, some liberal cunts gonna fuck something up and be a weak link, and be exploited by a possible enemy.
the other problem with this is that, states can secede from the union and actually start a civil war and kill each other. in a digital age, subversion is at its greatest
the whole point of our government system is checks and balances.
and when the federal government is too weak and states to strong the union crumbles.
>>77636669
I'm pretty sure I saw one of these dildo machine on youporn
>>77641826
Because if you can get that paperwork done it is legal. Do you want things that are for all practical purposes unobtainable or things that are illegal under all circumstances because the two are different.
>>77642021
able bodied men and I believe the age is up to 64 now.
>>77639696
constitution only says peoples right to vote can't be denied or abridged on account of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, or age if over 18
for the most part, suffrage rights are determined at the state level.
>>77641664
Currently, the unorganized militia is basically the draft. I'm talking about MANDATORY carry of a firearm and militia service, as in you get fined if you don't carry or show up.
>>77641741
Any Reason specifically? Citing your experience as a Marine doesn't mean anything if you have no argument.
>>77642175
constitution prohibits poll taxes too.
>>77642061
I used to hate liberal people now I just feel bad for them. I imagine the world must seem like a miserable place to them. When you only focus on the negative, you end up being blind to all the positive things you have and the value of your fellow Americans
>>77636669
Run, this legal immigrant has tank!
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jVs5kgvA_Ow" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
>>77641145
Same poster;
I know people can also own fully functioning bombers. I've talked to some. They said the only restriction on dropping live bombs from them is they have to let the state department know 24 hours in advance, and as long as it's on their property, its a green light.
Again, good luck getting a hold of a 500lb aerial bomb, but still, it's a perfectly legal thing to do.
>>77642374
should it be legal to have smallpox?
>>77641738
>>77641826
one of these days I'm going to fill out a form 1 for a nuke just to see the look on my CLEO's face. and after i convince him to sign it, make some poor fuck head working at the ATF's day that much stranger.
>>77637724
people in america own tanks.
stop being a FUCKING
PUSSY
>>77642225
Dude I think you're misunderstanding me.
If you are an able bodied man - regardless of military service, drafting, etc.. - You ARE militia. You don't sign up for it. You don't get drafted for it. You don't get forced into it. If you are born in America and you are in between the ages of 17-45; you are in the milita. Period.
>>77642326
yeah I've also noticed a
lot of the really whiny ones have some sort of mental health issue, which just reinforces my dislike of them; essentially their just projecting their self hatred onto other people in order to not feel bad.
that's why you see so many logical inconsistencies in their arguments
>>77641921
>You can modify your own weapon
>what is the Hughes amendment
>>77636669
Anyone that can afford it got too much to lose by acting retarded. Same with fighter jets.
>>77642225 I'm assuming you meant "active duty".
All 5 branches need to be under one unified federal government for the operate as effeciently as they do. The only reason the national gaurd works somewhat decently well in that model is because they are all reserve units, none of them are active duty.
There's all ready so much bureaucratic red tape with with different units, much less having CERTAIN STATES be responsible for certain aspects of the our military (coastal states responsible for the navy) it would be a huge, logistical clusterfuck. The only reason it works for the guard is that most of the time the guard is mobilized its either too
1. support active duty members overseas
2. for state emergencies
They both provide really important roles but for a fight force as lethal as the US military all active duty needs to under one unifying command and unifying unit.
>>77642572
wait for real there's a formal "militia"? source?
>>77642061
What I'm proposing is essentially the creation of 50 Nation-States, except they'd be run as republics instead of as Mob-Rule Democracies. States wouldn't have to secede, because they wouldn't be bound by any tenet but defense of their own from invading forces, or from forces outside North America.
>>77642271
not explicitly.
it was only interpreted that way because the poll tax disproportionately affected blacks when the SCOTUS was packed with civil rights activists
>>77642720
Amendment 24
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]
Seems pretty explicit to me.
>>77636669
>where and how do you draw the line?
I would say that there's a pretty clear line that can be drawn between small arms like guns and heavy weaponry like artillery or rocket launchers. A gun, whether it's a pistol or a rifle or even a machine gun, is a relatively precise weapon that only shoots what you're aiming at. On the other hand, something that explodes or kills with flame or gas is inherently indiscriminate; if you toss a grenade at a mugger, you'll blow up nearby innocents or property. There's no lawful use for a weapon like that, so it should be subject to strict regulation.
Basically, if it's a weapon that would have splash damage in a video game, then it should be regulated.
>>77637074
>"Hej jag är en böghora": the post
Bootlicking faggot.
>>77642572
I'm aware, but very few people currently train for that responsibility. That's the point I was trying to make.
>>77642664
You raise a good point. A weak army and navy was the primary reason that the Articles of Confederation failed, was it not?
>>77642634
Ok fair enough - I meant more along the lines of conversions etc. but I concede; you are correct. My bad
>>77642225
Also, if someone enlisted for active duty in NC but was really good at artillery which most training is AR, why would they be held to the NC "Army"? Your basically saying that all active duty should be abolished and the military should only follow the national guard model which just would be much slower at mobilizing and does not work well for a overseas, frontline force. When you join the gaurd you don't pick you MOS, they pick it for you based on whats nearby. That limits your recruitment options
>>77636669
>Can the national guard own and operate it?
Y: Legal
N: Illegal
>>77636669
Every weapon should be legal. Legal does not mean easily available. But any law abiding citizen should be able to have whatever they deem necessary to defend their liberty and property
>>77642673
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
>>77642832
i always forget the later amendments...
>>77642961
Exactly. Its just not as efficient. In theory its a nice idea, because it spreads out the power, theoretically. But even with technological advances it would limit your recruiting options, create unnecessary rivalies between states, etc... for active duty actions you ALWAYS need a unifying and consistent federal model.
Otherwise, its pretty much what we do already.
>>77642949
Absolutely incorrect. See all my previous posts. There is a reason that we are allowed to own any type of weapon - albeit with some difficulty for heavy weaponry.
If you use a grenade to kill a mugger, you have a common sense issue, not a weapon issue. In addition; obtaining those types of weapons takes a monetary and physical commitment that assures the purchaser realizes the implications and proper usage of their choice of weaponry
>>77643014
Is the slower Mobilization of NG forces something that could be fixed? and Is it really necessary to be fighting Overseas?
>>77643076
Thank you kind anon
>>77637158
>someone
It takes four people to operate one, not counting transporting it.
Plus, people already do own smaller artillery canons. How many of those have been used in a crime? 0
>>77642689
that was already tried(and it failed,and then replaced with our current system) states would have conflicting interests, different currencies.(and they did) and you could run into problems with a stronger state bullying other states with currency manipulation.
now that might not happen initially but it would be an issue later on as the demographic of each state becomes more homogeneous and different from other states.
thats just off the top my head too, theres a shit ton of problems with that system.
>freedom of movement
not to mention they didn't even face any of the technological issues we do now, and it failed.
>>77643321
>If you use a grenade to kill a mugger
well thats just reckless endangerment of your surroundings
>>77636669
The 2nd amendment was created so that we can protect ourselves from an unjust gov't or overthrow one when it is shit.
We should be able to purchase ICBM's and THADDS and F15's, because the spirit of that amendment was that americans always have a chance to combat the gov't in equal standing
>>77643063
>But any law abiding citizen should be able to have whatever they deem necessary to defend their liberty and property
even smallpox?
>>77642961
Just because you don't train for it does not alleviate you of you duty. In reality, it just means you'll likely die quicker in the case of a conflict requiring militia. No skin off anyone's back who does train unfortunately for you
>>77643360
No. All NG units stay in their respective states until they are called upon, in case of a state-wide emergency. No NG members are ever stationed (with very rare exceptions) in US overbase seas when they aren't on a combat/support deployment. You won't see the NC Air Guard hanging out near the DMZ.
Unless you wanted to make like, two NG's and then have one stay permanetely and one leave but at that point its just semantics.
We have strike groups all over the world on Active and Federal reserve duty so they can respond to global threats- AFRICOM, etc... but no NG guys will be there unless under very unusual circumstances.
this is my first thread that has taken off in a while - seems like the best bait is to act like you're on reddit
Yes it is legal for civilian use
>>77643568
I was just explaining the example the hound anon used lol
Most people probably don't know this but grenades don't really "explode" how most imagine it
>>77643612
If our society was less shit I don't see a problem with that.
>>77642511
>fill out a form 1
>Will the arm be reactivated
BITCH IT MIGHT BE
>>77643217
So we agree, the Articles system was too weak, but as we've seen recently with the attempts at removing due process, NSA and CIA dragnet spying operations, and heavy-handed "enforcement" of the 1968 Civil Rights act, is it possible that the U.S. Federal Government has TOO much power? How could we restrict the influence of a centralized Government without making the union too weak?
>>77643612
how exactly would you handle smallpox without being infected yourself?
>>77637047
Go fuck yourself, Canuck scum.
>>77643689
Luckily for you there's a solid group of vets trouncing around /pol/ the last 24 hours answering civilian questions/concerns/etc
>>77640618
Yes. See California gun laws. For the perfect example, look at California's hand gun roster. Require magazine disconnects-->Require chamber indicators-->Require microstamping (which doesn't exist and effectively bans semiautomatic handguns in the future).
>>77642511
I look forward to reading the headline "Man who frequents far right internet website applies to own a NUKE! Are the law though enough?"
>>77643612
I am fairly sure weaponized viruses/bacteria are banned under Geneva Convention which -fun fact- the US actually never signed
Even Scalia, who wrote the Heller decision, wrote that the right to bear arms isn't "unlimited."
No right is sacrosanct. There are reasonable limits to every constitutional right. The debate is where the line of "reason" is.
>>77637506
To be fair those are coordinated knife attacks with multiple attackers going after high density areas or fucking slitting people's throats while they're sleeping in the coal mines
>>77643915
Oh man, thats way above my pay grade dude, I'm just a dumb Marine. Hasn't that been the debate for the past 200 years? lol
Efficiency will always come at the expense of oversight and regulation, and vice versa. I do think that Fed has too much power, but restoring it to a Articles type military would smack our firepower down quite a bit.
CIA, thats a whole different beast, and where I am now I have to deal with those fuckheads all the time (fuck you if your watching me pricks)
But the Civil Rights movement actually moved forward because of mobilization of Active duty members (101st Airborne in Little Rock) against NG soldiers that followed governors orders instead of the Presidents. So... I guess it really boils down to electing non-shitheads. But we've never done that, have we? haha
>>77644278
>There are reasonable limits to every constitutional right
yeah, the limit is private property and secure areas.
>>77644278
what im curious about is if star trek phasers become real and a phaser will 100% stun every time, will old guns be outlawed?
>>77636669
IAHIHAIHAIHAIAHIAHIHAIHAIAHAIH
é o dia do filme! bah, vai ver mesmo se tu cata um mangolão pra te acompanhar com essa moda fudida que o Facebook criou. Tu ainda não percebeu, mas tu tá andando na brasa de um casal retardado. deve ser por isso que nasce esses bebes com cabeça pequena, não é por causa do mosquito. é por causa da genetica fudida que essa rede social de retardados criou.
>>77643600
THIS
People who want to restrict the 2nd amendment are beta little bitches who need daddy government to "protect" them
>>77638879
remember that time spain was all muslim in like 1300AD? oh wait....
>>77637220
NOT
>I've got you, brother
>>77636669
I personally draw the line with weapons that kill indiscriminately, such as grenades and rocket launchers (in before "recreational nukes").
>>77636669
IAHIHAIHAIHAIAHIAHIHAIHAIAHAIH
é o dia do filme! bah, vai ver mesmo se tu cata um mangolão pra te acompanhar com essa moda fudida que o Facebook criou. Tu ainda não percebeu, mas tu tá andando na brasa de um casal retardado. deve ser por isso que nasce esses bebes com cabeça pequena, não é por causa do mosquito. é por causa da genetica fudida que essa rede social de retardados criou. tu podes me considerrar um mendigo se quiser, não abro mão do meu intelecto hyperior pra uma fábrica de helenas/leticias. vai cagar no mato paris ow de paris hilton.
>>77637047
>155 light
Get the fuck outta here leaf
>>77636669
Its funny because I'll be buying a AR and a few handguns. I've never shot a gun in my life now thanks to these chuckle fucks specially the republican leaders I'm not going to be a first time buyer.
>>77640433
>Single Action sniper rifles
So.... SVD, M14s etc.... because Single action just means the pull of the trigger does ONE thing.
A single action revolver fires one round with each pull of the trigger
A single action 1911 fires one round with each pull of the trigger.
Same with all these other guns you're naming.
This is why I don't want people who know nothing about weapons telling me what kind of weapons i should and should not own based on how threatening I want to remain against a potential threat.
>>77644502
If Star Trek phasers become real I'm using that magic energy source inside to build a bitchin' railgun.
>>77636943
When the 2nd amendment was established private individuals owned cannons. Ideally they should be protected.
>>77644278
Its not that there are limits, but rather what is defined under that constitutional right.
for example
you are free to speak, anything you want. you can criticize people, government.
what is not protected under the Freedom of speech is libel. you cannot defame someone with false publication because you disagree with them. that is not what the freedom of speech is intended for.
therefor there are no limits on our rights which government is suppose to recognize, and preserve.
>>77644359
Yeah, i suppose it has; federalists and anti-federalists.
I've heard the arguments of putting a limit on the age of congressmen and senators, like 40 years, and limiting their terms, but when I think of the current state of SJWs and pants-on-head liberals, I abhor the thought of thouse people passing legislation.
I should have been more specific about the Civil Rights Act: specifically Title IV, and how the Obama administration used it to force Public schools to set up tranny bathrooms. "Gender != Sex" and all that horseshit.
Maybe the founders should have written a "Bill of Feds: DO NOT DO"?
>>77641385
A virus isn't a weapon, it is a living organism that can kill on it's own. If I drop a gun, at worse it will go off once and possibly kill someone in the room. If I drop a vial of a deadly virus it has the potential to spread.
>>77644892
good point. if the enterprise had a hard time moving an asteroid out of a collision course with a planet, i wonder if they had the capability to stop a 50 mile long metal rod traveling at warp speed
>>77644990
>Maybe the founders should have written a "Bill of Feds: DO NOT DO"?
That's literally what the bill of rights is
>>77644408
Well, I was thinking something more like, "The constitution imbues Congress with wide authority to act. If Congress has identified a compelling purpose and legislated to affect that end then that act of Congress is presumed to be constitutional."
>>77644973
Defamation is actually an excellent example of reasonable limits of the right to free speech.
>>77644502
No way. There will always be a robust market for collectors. I'm working on getting a Sharps carbine.
>>77644502
"Shall not Be Infringed" is an amendment that will surpass time and space.
So no.
If the United Earth Government can have hand-phasers that can blow up a tank than I want one too and then I also want a couple of AT-4s for shits and giggles to shoot at my milked out cows on the weekends.
>>77645184
And as we've seen, that didn't work out as well as we'd hoped. Still better than nothing.
>>77644990
the original intention of the enumerated powers was to explicitly list what congress could only do.
thank god Jefferson shilled endlessly for the bill of rights.
>>77637047
SHALL
>>77644990
Yeah, that will be an interesting debate. Will Obama mobilize federal reserve troops to enforce the tranny bathroom bill? Theoretically he could, it would fall under the guise of segregation. Active and reserve federal troops squared off with NG and police forces in certain states, Arkansas with the Little Rock Nine, Ruby Bridges in New Orleans with federal troops and marshals...
This is where I have a problem; I fucking HATE politicians, but at the end of the day, the military serves them. Imposing restrictions on the military can just put lives at risk. I think imposing limits on congressmen and senators would have much more of the desired effect you are looking for than imposing those on the military.
We serve the people, we all took an oath to fight all enemies, foreign and domestic. And nearly everyone I know in the military takes that VERY seriously. We are willing to kill and die for it. But we are only as strong, as agile, as victorious, as the politicians WANT us to be. And the line between our top generals and politicians is becoming more and more foggy.
I would be all for imposing much more restrictions on politicians that have a direct effect on our military's decisions.
>>77645417
So If I understand it properly, the enumerated powers specifically lists what Congress can and cannot do, how it cannot make any laws superseding the Bill of Rights, and anything not expressly delegated to the Congress, is the responsibility and power of the States and the People.
Did I get that right? How was Jefferson a Shill for it?
>>77644749
What defines indiscriminate?
Anything can be indiscriminate if used improperly.
I accidentally 2 Iraqi civilians during the 2nd Persian gulf war using a grenade.
However, I did kill the 3 other guys who were hiding out with them and I could have just as easily had the same 5 people killed using the bullets from my gun and the guns of the other people in my squad.
Indiscriminate killing originates from the person = not the weapon.
In my case I chose the safest option for the given situation that would net me the least loss of friendly and innocent life.
>>77637116
Get a load of this faggot.
>People who think that some guns should be legal (like the AR-15), where and how do you draw the line? You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
>>pic related, is not legal for civilian use
Anything used by any government unit that can be deployed in the US, including SWAT teams, and the National Guard.
Also, anything used by infantry in 50 percent of the world's armies.
If the shits safe enough to trust sub high school graduate meatheads in the army, or reserve police oficers with zero training, it's safe enough to trust the American people as a whole with it.
>>77643908
I'm still not sure what to put under the reason for owning section
>some /k/ fuck that works at the ATF said some one put "remove kebab" in that section
>>77636669
you retard. it's a destructive device and requires a lot of ppaperwork abd a background check but that is legal to own.
>>77645603
I'm fully aware of how the PFT / Physical standards were lowered for the Armed Forces, and It's clear how that undermines the effectiveness of our fighting forces. It's really a shame.
I have a problem with the fact that many of the US's career politicians can be upwards for 70, 80 years old, and many have been there for decades on decades. I think that having younger politicians that are replaced at a much faster rate, with term limits, would be worth the risk of SJWs. It's almost as if our senior Congressmen and Senators are stuck in the Cold War.
>>77636669
the line is drawn at small arms you fucking retard
>>77636943
even if it was I doubt the manufacturers would sell single units to a civillian
>>77645918
"Contingency for extraterrestrial invasion and or machine uprising"
>>77636669
>tfw when America will have stricter gun laws than Canada. Your feds are almost there with their retarded demonization of long guns.
>>77645752
the enumerated powers were supposed to be what congress was only able to do. everything not listed in the enumerated powers was to be left to the states.
Jefferson rightly worried that congress would do things outside of the enumerated powers and so campaigned heavily for a bill of rights. maddison objected to a bill of rights because he worried that listing what congress couldn't do would give the impression that congress could do something not listed in the bill of rights.
they compromised with the 9th and 10th amendments, but in the end they were both right.
>>77637116
which is why they're great for wasting nig nogs breaking into your home
>>77646201
Yeah, its a fucking shame. Luckily women stay away from the Marines because they know how savage we are. But I have buddies who are Rangers who have been bitching about the lowered standards/religious exemptions.
Like the guy with a Sikh Turban and beard? Good luck getting your mask and MOPP suit air tight in a chemically hot area under a minute.
A woman and can't carry a wounded soldier? Good luck getting cut down from machine gun fire while we can't drag or lift him.
Term limits, I'm all for. I really am. Limit the politicians ability to MAKE war; not the military's ability to wage it effectively when we do fight.
>>77645918
>irradiated wall with mexico
>>77636669
Weapons that big are classified as destructive devices and they are legal to own with a license.
S H A L L
A
L
L
>>77646415
And people think the founding fathers weren't thinking ahead and couldn't fathom what we would have to deal with today thus making the constitution "outdated".
just come here, nobody will take your guns
>>77637963
GOD BLESS AMERICA
>>77646620
To be fair I don't think one single soul a century ago thought the USA would be 62% non-hispanic white (European, Jew, Arab, Berber, Turk, Persian or North Indian) and 20t in debt in 2016.
If your holy forefathers foresaw the armaments available today they would have simply patented the technology and revolutionized the industry themselves.
>>77647061
My bad those are 2011 numbers. It's estimated this years census will be 57-59% non-hispanic white (doesn't include the 15,000,000 - 20,000,000 illegal economic migrants)
>>77647061
north indian is white what
>>77636669
I guess it depends on whether or not the weapons in question are arms that I can keep and/or bear.
Honestly, not as difficult as gun grabbers make it seem.
>>77638087
>F-22
you don't have to make it illegal because no one can fucking afford to operate one. They're $150 million apiece, and you have to spend an additional 70 grand per flight hour on upkeep on the damn thing. Not to mention you also need a team of mechanics who actually know how to repair the fucking thing, and you'd be spending a fuckton more on ammunition. Plus I don't think manufacturers sell them in anything other than bulk.
>nukes
nigger it is incredibly illegal to own a nuclear device, we come down hard on other fucking COUNTRIES for owning them.
>>77647255
holy shit man how new are you?
pic related
>>77647563
Nah they literally won't sell them. Harper originally said the F35 single engine wouldn't be acceptable due to the arctic and we'd petition for F22's instead but it was shot down almost immediately.
I think we're getting one hundred or so super hornets now that Trudeau is in charge. One hell of plane and probably the best bang for our buck in the history of AF procurement. Cancelling the F35 and going that route is probably the only decent move he's made so far.
>>77647563
Yeah I misread your comment. Oops.
>>77638879
hey remember that time that the only thing that kept spain from becoming a communist hellhole was a bunch of spanish civillians with guns?
at least know your own history retard
>>77648705
Eh wasn't that in the 1930's? IIRC the USA didn't do shit in that civil war I always thought the fascist Nationalists smashed the Republican commies due to superior leadership and help from Italy/Germany.
OP here, how is this thread still going
>>77637724
I do. A society in which individuals can own tanks and attack helicopters without ever misusing them is the highest human ideal.
>>77640361
this, its just a single-shot mechanism firing explosive bullets
>>77645911
thread
>>77636669
I don't.
If you can afford an ICBM and are an upstanding citizen you should be able to own one, same with a nuclear sub or an aircraft carrier.
Our forefathers were able to shoulder the strongest weapons of their day as citizens, why are not responsible enough?
>>77647563
They'll be for sale eventually.
SABB sells their drakken and I'm sure you can find a cannon or something on gunbroker and register it as a DD and then pay for the 20mm ammo at bulk prices from whomever.
>>77636669
https://www.armslist.com/posts/4616205/oklahoma-city-oklahoma-nfa-firearms-for-sale--fully-operational-main-battle-tank-with-120mm-live-cannon
faggot
>>77638604
http://www.buckstix.com/HowitzerHunt.htm
>>77636669
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>77637506
>9 attackers in the first attack
>8 in the 2nd
Also, they used swords, not knives.
You're literally defeating your own point. The Orlando killer cooked 50 BY HIMSELF. Anders Brevik killed almost 100 BY HIMSELF. And these attacks were in 1st world countries, not exclusively China.
>>77649582
Shoudn't matter if you're an upstanding citizen, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is universal.
Yeah we really need gun laws to stop the skyrocketing gun violence
>>77647563
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!
>>77637158
Give me a u-haul truck and some fertilizer and Ill solve all your building problems, anon
The line should be drawn where one person cannot effectively take down the entire system.
So basically, if you can destroy a building filled with people with it, and they cannot fight back, you shouldn't have it.
So C-4, large scale explosives. weapons of terror.
But in order for you to actually lesson the restrictions, you have to get rid of all the illegal immigration and have 0 net immigrants.
Otherwise people who hate our country will just slip through the governments giant fucking fingers.
So no Somalis, no mexicans, and no fucking fugees
>>77645283
I fear for the day of United Earth Government.
The only way I would accept such a proposal is if our population was homogenous and birth rates were steady.
I like my planet too much for it to be overpopulated and destroyed.
this country is fucking great
Put in my order for an F-35 this morning
See you in the air Yellow 13
>>77636669
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/564382332
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/565068368
You could totally own what's in that pic, OP. Except then you'd have to find somewhere to actually shoot the fucking thing.
>>77636669
Sorry to ruin your day op. They are somewhat common.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUTXNcrYoaA
>>77637074
Go get your wife's son so we can speak to someone more reasonable and intelligent.
>>77636669
>You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
Except I DO think every gun should be legal. I'm not afraid of blacks being armed like you liberals seem to be.
>>77637116
>as fast as you can pull the trigger
>undesirable
>>>/lgbt/
>>77636669
>You don't think that every weapon should be legal right?
Yes. Yes I do.
>>77636669
SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED
>>77636669
Yes, I believe that should be legal to own. I think non-military weapons should be open to own, cannot be refused without due process. Military weaponry should be regulated through showing proper training to use and safe and secure storage.
>>77636669
I don't personally think that snatching up weapons based mostly on cosmetics or limiting magazine size is the way to go. There are on rare occasions packs of wild niggers that need killing. Mental health screening and mandatory treatment for crazy assholes would be the way to go. I can't think of a mass shooter that wasn't some form of kook. Honestly in the US political and religious extremists don't go on shooting sprees unless they also happen to be some form of crazy asshole.
>>77661185
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>77636669
just use them ye olde bolt action rifle and shotguns.
also dont make your guns look tacticool, it scares the liberals, wood and metal is sexy.
