Assault weapons and bomb-carrying robots.....

[nat4900]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

 

[Rustic]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

First of all, you have no clue what so-called "assault weapon" is, an ar15 is just a sporting rifle.
You have no common sense to have any type of Rational opinion on the subject. Lol
Dumbass

 

[DarkFury]

Bombs and nukes fall under other rules idiot.
Bombs and nukes are NOT firearms.

 

[Obiwan]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

Are you hoping they'll let an idiot like you have a bomb???
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...klqWJEQFkfAFQNvzQ&sig2=Zq0AsaEHZ1RMgEyqN86mOQ

 

[Iceweasel]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

Nobody made that argument. The fact that liberals have to pull lies out of their asses to make their case is telling.

 

[pismoe]

people like Nat simply have no common sense . An American has the right to be equipped in the same fashion and with the same small arms as the American combat soldier .

 

[BluesLegend]

This is a LIE "The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one" So typical of the left filth they lie and lie and lie some more. They also propose preposterous scenarios in a dishonest attempt to spin, another form of lying. These people are not worthy of being Americans fuck just move to North Korea you freaks.

 

[whitehall]

What the hell is this, new left wing logic? Does the left assume that a citizen can and should be able to purchase and use any weapon the Police use? Is the left going crazy? Next they will tell us that citizens should be able to purchase a freaking Atomic Bomb because the military has them.

 

[nat4900]

Just weeks ago you right wing morons were arguing that you needed assault weapons to fight off "government" forces if you needed to.......using the same weaponry as they may have.....Are you now DENYING this?

 

[Obiwan]

What the hell is this, new left wing logic? Does the left assume that a citizen can and should be able to purchase and use any weapon the Police use? Is the left going crazy? Next they will tell us that citizens should be able to purchase a freaking Atomic Bomb because the military has them.

Maybe bug spray just isn't cutting it, and the OP thinks we need a better way of keeping the Gnat population down...

 

[BluesLegend]

Just weeks ago you right wing morons were arguing that you needed assault weapons to fight off "government" forces if you needed to.......using the same weaponry as they may have.....Are you now DENYING this?

^^^ still lying look there's your credibility shattered on the floor.

 

[nat4900]

An American has the right to be equipped in the same fashion and with the same small arms as the American combat soldier .

Sorry, my mistake.....I did not "read" the above in the 2nd amendment......It must be written in a right wing version of that right.

 

[Rustic]

What the hell is this, new left wing logic? Does the left assume that a citizen can and should be able to purchase and use any weapon the Police use? Is the left going crazy? Next they will tell us that citizens should be able to purchase a freaking Atomic Bomb because the military has them.

Ya, the boneheads think an ar15 is a assault weapon. Lol
The Fucking lemmings will believe anything and everything the media and federal government tell them is true.. Lol

 

[Rustic]

An American has the right to be equipped in the same fashion and with the same small arms as the American combat soldier .

Sorry, my mistake.....I did not "read" the above in the 2nd amendment......It must be written in a right wing version of that right.

You enjoy being pussy whipped??

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just weeks ago you right wing morons were arguing that you needed assault weapons to fight off "government" forces if you needed to.......using the same weaponry as they may have.....Are you now DENYING this?

^^^ still lying look there's your credibility shattered on the floor.

If you have a link to that, by all means, share the comedy.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

Until you can provide a definition of "assault rifle" and how it differs from a "non-assault" rifle, any discussion will remain at the level of barroom academics.

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

No, but remember the first words of the BOR - "Congress shall make no law". The BOR is a restrictive document, and those words apply to the entire BOR.

Also, the issue is not guns at all, but violent criminal behavior. Remove the violent criminal elements from society permanently, and violent crime will plummet.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

You really do not know anything about weapons . A simple RC car could be a bomb carrying robot.

 

[DarkFury]

Just weeks ago you right wing morons were arguing that you needed assault weapons to fight off "government" forces if you needed to.......using the same weaponry as they may have.....Are you now DENYING this?

YOU do realize you just bailed on your own OP?
Its been shown you are an idiot and now you are side stepping.
Define the word "assault" and tell readers what caliber it is?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Sweet Jebus this is a stupid thread

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No decent American would object to the Dallas' SWAT using a robot with a bomb to blow to kingdom-come the bastard sniper.....good riddance to evil.

However, I have a question based on recent threads on this forum:

The right wing "rationale" against ANY ban of assault rifles being sold to virtually whomever wants one has been that IF the police have such an assault weapon, THEN the average American under the 2nd amendment must ALSO be able to purchase such a weapon.......

If we follow that same mindset, should the average American be ALSO able to purchase a bomb-carrying robot under the rationale that anything that law enforcement may have the average American is also entitled to have? .

Needless to say rightwing ‘rationale’ is idiocy.

The types of firearms the military, law enforcement, or any other armed government entity might have has no bearing whatsoever on the right of individuals to possess firearms.

The right of citizens to possess firearms is separate and apart from the types of weapons government might possess – there is nothing in the history of the Second Amendment or its case law recognizing ‘quid pro quo’ with regard to how the government is armed:

‘We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”’

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

Clearly, bomb-carrying robots constitute weapons both dangerous and unusual, where their possession is not entitled to Constitutional protections, and their prohibition indeed warranted.