Should fully automatic rifles and shotguns be available for civilian purchase in the United States, with no more restrictions than semi-automatic rifles?
Yes. Source: "Shall not be infringed."
>>77377071
>restrictions
>right
You dont get that fact dont you?
sure, why the hell not
sounds fun
>>77377071
Yes
Sure
>>77377071
Yes
>>77377071
Why not small tactical nukes, tanks and fighter planes? Are you not free?
>>77377071
Yes, this also>>77377297
SHALL
>>77377071
Yup
>>77377071
Yes they should be.
>>77377071
I think owning a gun is a basic human right and that the US government should be responsible for providing every US citizen their first fully automatic rifle, ammunition and political targets free of charge.
They already are, dumbass.
>>77377071
It wouldn't matter if they're banned. You can still easily find them. Fucking Eurocucks can get fully automatic rifles on the darknet.
>>77377730
Foreigners opinions discarded
>>77377750
NOT
>>77377730
Nice argument, cuck.
Yes. It's mostly impractical and sub optimal for combat situations. Liberals could argue gun control way better then they do now but don't know anything about guns. Kinda funny.
>>77378151
What about shooting up a crowded venue situations?
>>77377071
yes but only after extensive background checks
you wouldn't want Tyrone to buy a fully automatic assault rifle
>>77377730
Tanks and fighter planes can be privately owned. Nukes are ordinance. You are retarded.
>>77378318
Edge that cuts.
>>77377071
Yes. All weapons should be. If you can't buy MANPADs in a supermarket, you are not free.
>>77378968
What if Hillary Clinton gives them away to me? Is I at last be truly free?
>>77378476
>Ordinance
>>77378797
It's a realistic question, because there's far more of those situations then there are conventional combat situations in the US.
>>77378318
Just like the Orlando shooter, it more efficient to use semi auto. You get a better spread and higher accuracy for your round. Full auto that ar and you'll just dump a mag into 2 people and need to reload in 2 seconds. The military doesn't even have most of their rifles outfitted for full auto because of this.
Repeat after me:
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
>>77377071
yes. They are less dangerous than semi in the hands of untrained people.
I also think that suppressors shouldn't have any restrictions either
>>77377071
Yes.
>Unbelievably expensive legal or not.
>Replacing a new barrel every 5-10k rounds
>800 rounds a minute or $4-500ish a minute of continuous use.
>Horribly inaccurate
>Prone to more malfunction
People who object to these guns know nothing about these guns.
>>77379428
Guns are black and remind me of penises. That makes them both racist and sexist.
We need equality and tolerance in this world.
>>77379428
The 2nd ammendment is an "ammendment".
It can be repealed any time the Government sees fit.
>>77377071
Yes and explosives should be legal too. Back when the 2nd amendment was created civilians could own anything the military could. This even included cannons and man of wars. The arsenal of a private citizen should only be limited by what they have the know how to make or their fund available for purchasing weapons.
>>77379907
Not really. It'd be technically possible to amend another amendment that goes against the previous amendment, but the government can't just up and do that.
There's a reason why the faggot brigade always has to weasel around switching up the Constitution.
>>77379907
Guaranteed insurrection if they pull that.
>>77379184
INFRINGED
>>77379184
INFRINGED
>>77379718
We need equality of oppertunity and a culling of degenerate humanoids.
>>77380147
The government just up and did that when they repealed the eighteenth amendment prohibiting alcohol.
>>77379907
the US does not write itself whatever it wants in its own defining document, dumbfuck. the states have to hold a con-con to legally change the COTUS.
>>77377071
when armed americans are viewed as a threat by their own state it says more about the state then the people itself
>>77380431
You're saying it didn't take another amendment to do that? The government just "up and did it?"
Perhaps my understanding of history is flawed.
Yes. I play video games.
>>77380495
>the US does not write itself whatever it wants in its own defining document
Hehe
Do you know what the word "ammendment" means?
It is the US writting whatever it wants its own Constitution to say.
>>77380431
false. the senate and house have a pair of bills which they must pass in order to agree on the proposal of a new amendment. if either of these fails then the US cannot even make a proposal. if they pass there is still presidential veto, as usual, but it can be overridden, as usual. not sure how the proposed 18th played out there. but i do know this: the states must all ratify the proposed amendment, otherwise, the US government has not changed.
the US belongs to the states, not the other way around.
>>77378476
Ordinance falls under the definition of arms, if it didnt then you could own guns but no ammo.
>>77377730
>>77377071
white civilians, yes
>>77380998
That fella agrees with me.
The Government can change its own Constitution.
>>77377730
Fun fact, all of these are already legal to own.
>>77381143
this is a good one
>tfw cuckservatives will "compromise" our 2nd amendment rights away
>>77381301
>>77381275
I don't know what you don't understand about how the US works. This isn't the EU. There is no "the government" when it comes to changing the Constitution.
"The government" can do whatever it wants when it comes to violating the Constitution, but actually changing it requires requires way to much mass consent to just up and change it at a whim. It's part of those pesky old checks and balances we have.
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconsitutional takes longer"
-Dr. Henry Kissinger
>can't refute my statement
>I-I-It's just a prank bro
>>77377071
While I have you all here:
Didn't they get this exactly backwards?
"What is an assault weapon?
An assault weapon is a rapid-fire, magazine-fed rifle designed for military use. It is a shoulder-fired weapon that allows the shooter to select between semiautomatic (requiring you pull the trigger for each shot), fully automatic (hold the trigger and the gun continuously fires) or three-shot-burst mode.
What is an "assault rifle?"
Technically, there is no such thing. What’s called an assault rifle in reports on gun violence is actually a semi-automatic rifle that looks similar to the assault weapons used by the military. An AR-15 rifle, like one that has been used in some mass shootings, is an example of this type of weapon. "
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/national/assault-weapon-vs-assault-rifle-what-difference/nrgBn/
>>77382086
That website is a piece of shit. I say we ban assault websites.
Gas all the kikes, and let the roads run red with with blood of all web developers. "Sir" Tim Burners-Lee's head on a nice big pike.
>>77377297
came here to post this
>>77377071
Of course.
>>77377730
>he doesn't own a tank
http://www.armslist.com/posts/4616205/oklahoma-city-oklahoma-nfa-firearms-for-sale--fully-operational-main-battle-tank-with-120mm-live-cannon
>>77377071
yes and all NFA regulations should be put on ordnance/RPG's instead
