The second amendment and military grade firearms

[338Shooter]

By Michael LeMieux
August 8, 2011
NewsWithViews.com


http://www.newswithviews.com/LeMieux/michael156.htm

 

[Super Dave]

A good read, but it's been said over and over again. I know it, you know it. The trouble is, although the country is filled with firearm owners, who among them would actually stick their necks out to do what's right?

I agree, there is no good reason any law abiding citizen should not be able to own a military weapon, like M-16, AK, or even something of newer design, manufactured last year. There is no good reason to impose a $200 tax. There is no good reason to require that law abiding citizens that do own said weapons should be on a registry. The fact is, it hinders our right to bear arms (any arm we should choose) for the very reason of overcoming the tyranny of government gone wild. BUT... unless we stand as a whole people, it will only continue to get more restrictive, just as the Governor of Pennsylvania said way back when, as he gave Parliament his thoughts on the matter of disarming the people. The fact is, it will never happen (standing united on the problem). Sad, but true.

Did you see the author is from Midwest City?

 

[grizzly97]

A good read, but it's been said over and over again. I know it, you know it. The trouble is, although the country is filled with firearm owners, who among them would actually stick their necks out to do what's right?

I agree, there is no good reason any law abiding citizen should not be able to own a military weapon, like M-16, AK, or even something of newer design, manufactured last year. There is no good reason to impose a $200 tax. There is no good reason to require that law abiding citizens that do own said weapons should be on a registry. The fact is, it hinders our right to bear arms (any arm we should choose) for the very reason of overcoming the tyranny of government gone wild. BUT... unless we stand as a whole people, it will only continue to get more restrictive, just as the Governor of Pennsylvania said way back when, as he gave Parliament his thoughts on the matter of disarming the people. The fact is, it will never happen (standing united on the problem). Sad, but true.

Did you see the author is from Midwest City?

^^^This!

 

[MLR]

A good read, but it's been said over and over again. I know it, you know it. The trouble is, although the country is filled with firearm owners, who among them would actually stick their necks out to do what's right?

Many gunowners only support rights that affect them. In that respect they are no different than those who would take those right away. The anti's would scream if their rights were touched and many gun owners would do the same. Sadly there are many in both camps who see no problem with taking away the rights of others.

Before the machine gun ban of 1986 was enacted I was trying to gather support against it. I was very surprised at the number of avid shooters who had no problem with the ban. Some told me that no one needed a machine. Others said that so long as they don't take my shotgun I don't care what laws they make. We have people in our camp who could not care less about rights unless it directly affects them.

Michael

 

[Biggsly]

No one really needs a smoke, 3D tv, or extra bacon on a cheese burger. Of coarse the government wants to take two of those three away also.

 

[Super Dave]

Many gunowners only support rights that affect them. In that respect they are no different than those who would take those right away. The anti's would scream if their rights were touched and many gun owners would do the same. Sadly there are many in both camps who see no problem with taking away the rights of others.

Before the machine gun ban of 1986 was enacted I was trying to gather support against it. I was very surprised at the number of avid shooters who had no problem with the ban. Some told me that no one needed a machine. Others said that so long as they don't take my shotgun I don't care what laws they make. We have people in our camp who could not care less about rights unless it directly affects them.

Michael

Kinda like what Martin Niemöller is so famous for saying;

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.


Many years ago, I was off, and spending part of the day pawn shop hopping, looking for hidden deals, and whatnot. I went to Kirk's Pawn on N.W. Meridian. Kirk, the owner was there working. I was looking at his gun stuff, and asking about an SKS he had. He asked me what I wanted something like that for. He then went on about how civilians don't have "any business" owning weapons like that, that they only belonged in the hands of the police and military. Kirk went on about being a retired police officer, blah blah blah. I am not knocking police officers in any way shape or form. I am a big supporter. I am knocking elitist assholes. They don't have an FFL at Kirk's anymore.

Whether I was looking at his $99 SKS, or a Heckler and Koch MP5K-PDW, it is my constitutionally given birthright.


Thanks for not getting me riled up, Dustin.

 

[338Shooter]

You're welcome Dave.

 

[AKguy1985]

I used to work with a guy that had that argument. "Why do you need a machinegun" he asked and i replied Because this is America and i can. I kinda compare it to owning a ferrari, you dont necessarily need one......but if you want it you can own one.

 

[Michael Brown]

No one really needs extra bacon on a cheese burger.

Heyyyyyyy!!!! Slow down.

No one needs to get hurt over this.

Michael Brown

 

[dutchwrangler]

Heyyyyyyy!!!! Slow down.

No one needs to get hurt over this.

Michael Brown

I think that's how the cow's view the issue of burgers. They keep trying to get us to eat more chicken.