Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have no one on ignore.
Ignores are for the mentally abused.
I'm able to ignore a member w/o having them on ignore.
I have debunked everything you have thrown out so far. They are ALL legal to own. With permits and actually having someone willing to sell them to you
Actually, you're legally allowed to own the EMPTY TUBE after it has already been fired.
I have yet to find anyplace that says you can legally own an active missile.
Yeah, I saw an M2 at the DMV awhile back but it didn't have the machine gun ring.
Yeah, I saw an M2 at the DMV awhile back but it didn't have the machine gun ring.
As far as I know Rich's APC and Sherman are both fully functional. He doesn't keep the weaponry on the vehicles all of the time.
In my opinion instead of banning assault weapons--I would require a multi-million dollar insurance liability policy on them with a certificate of insurance to be provided to the licensed gun dealer prior to the sell.
The insurance company--(through prudent business measures) would have to do a birth to current mental health--criminal--and ass examination before they would ever issue a policy on this weapon
making assault weapons much more expensive and thereby taking a lot of the macho-miso interest out of these weapons.
.I would also MANDATE--that no gun can be sold from individual to individual or given to another and that all trades and sales have to go through a licensed gun dealer
And that all registered owners of weapons sign a sworn statement that they will be the only one using the gun
and when the gun is not in their personal possession that it along with the ammunition is locked in a gun safe
If the gun is stolen or lost that the registered owner is personally liable for any harm it does to innocents.
Yeah, I saw an M2 at the DMV awhile back but it didn't have the machine gun ring.
As far as I know Rich's APC and Sherman are both fully functional. He doesn't keep the weaponry on the vehicles all of the time.
Sounds fun, a money pit but a heck of a lot of fun if a guy can afford it.
As far as I know Rich's APC and Sherman are both fully functional. He doesn't keep the weaponry on the vehicles all of the time.
Sounds fun, a money pit but a heck of a lot of fun if a guy can afford it.
Hooper's been working on Saabs since I met him back in the 70's.. has 3-4 mechanics wife does the parts buying and book keeping. He gets his money.
I have debunked everything you have thrown out so far. They are ALL legal to own. With permits and actually having someone willing to sell them to you
Actually, you're legally allowed to own the EMPTY TUBE after it has already been fired.
I have yet to find anyplace that says you can legally own an active missile.
Is that because you aren't actually looking? You do know those weapons are not made by the military, don't you? They are made by private contractors, also known as citizens, and sold to the government. Unless the government is actually breaking the law by buying from people who cannot legally own those weapons, it is legal for private citizens to own them, and even trade in them.
Actually, you're legally allowed to own the EMPTY TUBE after it has already been fired.
I have yet to find anyplace that says you can legally own an active missile.
Is that because you aren't actually looking? You do know those weapons are not made by the military, don't you? They are made by private contractors, also known as citizens, and sold to the government. Unless the government is actually breaking the law by buying from people who cannot legally own those weapons, it is legal for private citizens to own them, and even trade in them.
If it's possible for a United States citizen to own a fully functional missile that is capable of bringing down aircraft, please provide a link proving it.
And........................for those that "believe" that a private citizen is able to own a fully functioning tank (meaning that it can fire heavy artillery), please provide proof and a link. I've yet to hear (or see on a YouTube video that wasn't faked) a private citizen with a fully functioning tank capable of firing heavy artillery.
The ATF regulates what kind of shells can be fired from a civilian owned cannon - the bullets must be of solid aluminum so as to prevent the use of high explosive and anti-personnel rounds.
In many countries, the sale, possession, and use of model rocket motors is subject to governmental rules and regulations. High-Power rockets in the United States, are only federally regulated in their flight guidelines by the FAA. However, the motor manufacturers and National Rocketry Organizations have established a self-regulating industry through the outside help of National Fire Protection Association - NFPA. This self-regulation of industry requires a user to become certified for use before a manufacturer will sell him a motor. In North America, the two recognized organizations that provide high-power certifications are Tripoli Rocketry Association and the National Association of Rocketry, both of these organizations have three levels of certification which involves building progressively more complex and higher powered rockets and taking a test of safety rules and regulations. The U.S. government regulatory documents surrounding high-powered rocketry is FAA FAR Part 101. With the general Association bodies using TRA and NFPA 1127 safetycodes. In Canada the Canadian Association of Rocketry has a four-step certification process, but all three organizations accept the other's certifications if a flyer shows up at a high-power launch and wishes to fly under their sanction. Some states restrict the maximum impulse to a G motor, and have adopted NFPA safety codes for launch site requirements.
Level 1 certification qualifies you to purchase and use H and I engines, Level 2 certification J, K, and L engines and Level 3 certification M, N, and O engines. Note: Canada adds another step in between, and has a Level 4 which is the same as US Level 3.
In the late 1990s, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives began demanding that individuals obtain a Low Explosives Users Permit (LEUP) to possess and use high-powered motors. On February 11, 2000, Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc. and the National Association of Rocketry filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia claiming that the BATF applied "onerous and prohibitive civil regulations" against sport rocketry hobbyists due to the Bureau's improper designation of Ammonium Perchlorate Composite Propellant (APCP) as an explosive. APCP is used in most high-power rocket motors.
How about nuclear weapons?
Is the reasoning sound not to have those available and/or otherwise accessible to citizens?
Why/why not?
Proof of the stewpud.
other than having to deal with freedom hating liberals....
we are supposed to have the same weapons available to us.
read any Founders letters about it.
The really interesting part of this is I actually forgot my high school had a firing range, and I actually used it. (No cracks about age and memory, I still know more than most of the people on this forum, and some of what I know is actually true.)
You don't think that massacre's of school children with todays modern weapons are exceptional enough to warrant change in gun laws?
No, because you've gone from fallacy of accident, to fallacy of equivocation.
The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. This is not an absolute right. The right to bear arms can be limited for exceptional circumstances IN REGARDS TO ARMS THEMSELVES. In other words, exceptional weapons (like nuclear weapons, biological weapons, chemical weapons, etc.) warrant exceptions to the general rule because those weapons themselves are exceptional.
Guns are not exceptional. They are normal arms. The fact that crime is committed with weapons does create permissibility under the second amendment to impede the right of people to bear normal arms.
Really? You don't thing the founding fathers would have found an AR15 an "exceptional" weapon? The ability to fire dozens of rounds in seconds would not have been considered exceptional to George Washington? Are you sure?
But nice dodge on the numbers of deaths before change should be considered.
Why not just come out plainly and say; it does not matter how many innocent people are killed. I would not support any change to todays gun laws.
At least be honest that your desire for guns outweighs anyone elses concern for safety from guns.
And you know what. If the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Luanza had not been on the rack for his mother to buy, Adam would not have had the use of such an effiecent killing weapon to use on those kids. That's the undeniable truth.
Actually, you're legally allowed to own the EMPTY TUBE after it has already been fired.
I have yet to find anyplace that says you can legally own an active missile.
Is that because you aren't actually looking? You do know those weapons are not made by the military, don't you? They are made by private contractors, also known as citizens, and sold to the government. Unless the government is actually breaking the law by buying from people who cannot legally own those weapons, it is legal for private citizens to own them, and even trade in them.
If it's possible for a United States citizen to own a fully functional missile that is capable of bringing down aircraft, please provide a link proving it.
And........................for those that "believe" that a private citizen is able to own a fully functioning tank (meaning that it can fire heavy artillery), please provide proof and a link. I've yet to hear (or see on a YouTube video that wasn't faked) a private citizen with a fully functioning tank capable of firing heavy artillery.
The really interesting part of this is I actually forgot my high school had a firing range, and I actually used it. (No cracks about age and memory, I still know more than most of the people on this forum, and some of what I know is actually true.)
No one should make cracks about age. My old school still had one when I moved in the 80s.
I thought it was a fairly simple concept. Guess I need to start writing at, say, a 4th-grade level?-- That's it? You don't want to defend or explain your premise here?
Shit, you were doing so well. Don't give up now...
Guess it was a flash in the pan then. Too bad, here I thought you were progressing beyond the drive-by.
Too much to expect...
Actually, you're legally allowed to own the EMPTY TUBE after it has already been fired.
I have yet to find anyplace that says you can legally own an active missile.
Is that because you aren't actually looking? You do know those weapons are not made by the military, don't you? They are made by private contractors, also known as citizens, and sold to the government. Unless the government is actually breaking the law by buying from people who cannot legally own those weapons, it is legal for private citizens to own them, and even trade in them.
If it's possible for a United States citizen to own a fully functional missile that is capable of bringing down aircraft, please provide a link proving it.
And........................for those that "believe" that a private citizen is able to own a fully functioning tank (meaning that it can fire heavy artillery), please provide proof and a link. I've yet to hear (or see on a YouTube video that wasn't faked) a private citizen with a fully functioning tank capable of firing heavy artillery.
Kent State is a miniature example of what we can expect from the military. Municipal police agencies, which are and have been increasingly militarized, are even better examples.I disagree...at just about every given time in history, the government has means of overpowering it's citizens.I'm insinuating that a government who has something to fear from its citizens thinks twice before doing stupid shit and stripping people of their freedoms. Whereas now it is a citizenry afraid of their government and all sorts of tyranny is going down.
Certainly today.
To think otherwise is nuts.
And what makes you think the U.S. Military will arbitrarily side with progressive tyranny against Americans... I'd say that sort of thinking is what really qualifies as nuts.
The really interesting part of this is I actually forgot my high school had a firing range, and I actually used it. (No cracks about age and memory, I still know more than most of the people on this forum, and some of what I know is actually true.)
No one should make cracks about age. My old school still had one when I moved in the 80s.
Where I grew up, on Orcas Island, you were considered gay or mentally retarded if you didn't own at least one gun. We all had firing ranges..it was called your back 40 or your front 40 or your left or right 40's
