Bumpfire Stock Ban

[emapples]

That’s a weak stance. You going to move rubber bands and belt loops to the NFA as well?

Man up!

So you have a problem with the NFA and class III restrictions, and you’d like to this repealed in its entirety??

Are you saying we should be allowed to have any kind of arms we want? Should we also have grenades, claymores, C4, RPG’s, SMAWS, Javelins? ? The right to bear arms is a very basic term, it doesn’t say the right to bare any kind of arms ever invented from now to eternity? nuclear warhead are arms too, should we have the rights to bear them? Just trying to be sensible and realistic...... biological weapons can be considered arms, maybe you think we should had the right to have these as well? You are gonna need a much bigger building once those are available for purchase

 

[caojyn]

 

[Glocktogo]

So you feel then that as long as YOU don't harm anyone then everything should be allowed (i.e. LAWS, machine guns, claymore mines, tanks, rockets, grenades, anything you can afford) to have and use anywhere and at anytime YOU want with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever? Then welcome to Mogadishu, Somalia or any other war-lord run shiz-hole where anything goes.

Horrible argument Chuckie. First, cans can't hurt anyone unless you hit someone on the head with it, and most of the modern ones don't even make a decent bludgeon.

Second, most of the stuff you listed IS legal to own and possess. There are registered destructive devices that run the gamut from small explosive devices, to artillery guns (and shells), to this Chieftan MK VI main battle tank with registered live 120mm gun and shells, that sold for $250,000 a few years ago in Oklahoma City.

Mike Dillon had a Navy fighter jet with live 20mm cannon before he passed (though he had to have DoD & FAA approval for that one).

There's a lot of heavy firepower out there in civilian hands that you may be unaware of, simply because people for the most part, don't misuse it. So yes, it should be and is legal.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I guess it's more of "I can't believe the ATF gave their blessing" kind of thought.

Don't confuse the fact that they couldn't do anything about them as being their "blessing."

Woody

 

[emapples]

Horrible argument Chuckie. First, cans can't hurt anyone unless you hit someone on the head with it, and most of the modern ones don't even make a decent bludgeon.

Second, most of the stuff you listed IS legal to own and possess. There are registered destructive devices that run the gamut from small explosive devices, to artillery guns (and shells), to this Chieftan MK VI main battle tank with registered live 120mm gun and shells, that sold for $250,000 a few years ago in Oklahoma City.

Mike Dillon had a Navy fighter jet with live 20mm cannon before he passed (though he had to have DoD & FAA approval for that one).

There's a lot of heavy firepower out there in civilian hands that you may be unaware of, simply because people for the most part, don't misuse it. So yes, it should be and is legal.

I think the argument is should they be available to anyone with same simplicity as purchasing a pistol....I could be wrong but maybe we need a new vote thread, should we repeal all gun laws? Basically canning it to anyone can own any arms they see fit as long as they can afford them

 

[Glocktogo]

I think the argument is should they be available to anyone with same simplicity as purchasing a pistol....I could be wrong but maybe we need a new vote thread, should we repeal all gun laws? Basically canning it to anyone can own any arms they see fit as long as they can afford them

All things considered, we should err on the side of freedom and self determination. Along with that, a return to the good sense of personal, individual responsibility. If you've PROVEN you're incapable of handling those responsibilities in society, only then should they be restricted or rescinded.

 

[emapples]

All things considered, we should err on the side of freedom and self determination. Along with that, a return to the good sense of personal, individual responsibility. If you've PROVEN you're incapable of handling those responsibilities in society, only then should they be restricted or rescinded.

Same problem, the constitution says shall not be infringed and doesn’t cover the fact that someone may or may nor be cababke it should or shouldn’t be trusted with them

 

[Chuckie]

I think the argument is should they be available to anyone with same simplicity as purchasing a pistol....I could be wrong but maybe we need a new vote thread, should we repeal all gun laws? Basically canning it to anyone can own any arms they see fit as long as they can afford them

Thank you and yes, that is what it is all comes down to. Should a line be drawn concerning what is allowed to everyone, what is allowed to only those with special permits, and what is not allowed on the civilian market, period.

 

[JYoung]

You all know that binary triggers will be next, right. Then what?

 

[Glocktogo]

Same problem, the constitution says shall not be infringed and doesn’t cover the fact that someone may or may nor be cababke it should or shouldn’t be trusted with them

Agreed. those are the people who should be in prison if or until they can become capable.