Do You Disagree With Not Being Able To Buy/Own A Tank?

[BallsBrunswick]

Can you not legally own a tank if you go through the required measures? There are literally dozens and dozens of private military hardware collectors in the US who own tanks.

 

[Ernie S.]

Can you not legally own a tank if you go through the required measures? There are literally dozens and dozens of private military hardware collectors in the US who own tanks.

Plus just about every VFW post in the country.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Can you not legally own a tank if you go through the required measures? There are literally dozens and dozens of private military hardware collectors in the US who own tanks.

Plus just about every VFW post in the country.

You can't own a weaponized tank or fighter jet.

 

[Ernie S.]

Where'd Marc go?

 

[OODA_Loop]

Can you not legally own a tank if you go through the required measures? There are literally dozens and dozens of private military hardware collectors in the US who own tanks.

The weapons must be demilitarized.

 

[J.E.D]

I have no idea what they wanted, but all the guys who were involved in the drafting of the Constitution and then became the Presidents and Congressmen did not create laws to make the government the only entity allowed to own certain weapons. In fact, the US used to lease private naval vessels and weapons from private citizens to combat threats. Likewise, they didn't institute an income tax, entitlements, etc etc etc

Keep talking shit because you don't know your history though...

Tell me again how the exclusion of a ban on cannons and naval vessels by the authors of the 2nd amendment meant that early Americans could possess them. Oh, and if you could throw a 'libtard' in there, that would be extra special.

Ok, pal? Thanks.

You seriously want me to show you how not having a law against owning something means you can own it?

Okay, there are no laws against owning apples and I OWN A FUCKING APPLE SUP

libtard

 

[Ernie S.]

Can you not legally own a tank if you go through the required measures? There are literally dozens and dozens of private military hardware collectors in the US who own tanks.

Plus just about every VFW post in the country.

You can't own a weaponized tank or fighter jet.

Not current weapons technology, but most obsolete weapons made before 1986 are legal to own.

 

[francoHFW]

OP-Sure, if you disarm it.

See "Tank", with James Garner. You don't need a gun to do a lot of damage...lol

I believe to BEAR arms you have to be able to at least CARRY them LOL

 

[LibertyLemming]

check

 

[Ringel05]

OP-Sure, if you disarm it.

See "Tank", with James Garner. You don't need a gun to do a lot of damage...lol

I believe to BEAR arms you have to be able to at least CARRY them LOL

For someone with your limited mental capabilities... yeah, you would only comprehend just one aspect of the definition of "to bear".

 

[Againsheila]

How about nuclear weapons?

Is the reasoning sound not to have those available and/or otherwise accessible to citizens?

Why/why not?

Yes, I think everyone should be able to buy and own a tank. Not nuclear weapons though. As I said, they can wipe out the world. IMO, they should all be gotten rid of, I don't believe that "mutually assured destruction" is a good thing.

 

[Pogo]

OP-Sure, if you disarm it.

See "Tank", with James Garner. You don't need a gun to do a lot of damage...lol

I believe to BEAR arms you have to be able to at least CARRY them LOL

For someone with your limited mental capabilities... yeah, you would only comprehend just one aspect of the definition of "to bear".

That was Oddball's point. I done schooled him on further definitions and he hasn't been back. Doesn't matter anyway since the Amendment reads "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms", so "keep" is already there.

Notice it doesn't say "use" Arms though. Just 'keep' and 'bear'.
Can I get my SCOTUS seat now?

 

[Pogo]

How about nuclear weapons?

Is the reasoning sound not to have those available and/or otherwise accessible to citizens?

Why/why not?

Yes, I think everyone should be able to buy and own a tank. Not nuclear weapons though. As I said, they can wipe out the world. IMO, they should all be gotten rid of, I don't believe that "mutually assured destruction" is a good thing.

Bingo- that's where we were going. Now logically, if we can draw the line at nuclear weapons due to their level of impact, can we not draw the same line at any level for the same reason?

Or to put it the opposite way, is not a ban on personal nukes by definition an infringement of the Second Amendment?

 

[Lakhota]

Deranged NaziCon logic...

 

[Ringel05]

OP-Sure, if you disarm it.

See "Tank", with James Garner. You don't need a gun to do a lot of damage...lol

I believe to BEAR arms you have to be able to at least CARRY them LOL

For someone with your limited mental capabilities... yeah, you would only comprehend just one aspect of the definition of "to bear".

That was Oddball's point. I done schooled him on further definitions and he hasn't been back. Doesn't matter anyway since the Amendment reads "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms", so "keep" is already there.

Notice it doesn't say "use" Arms though. Just 'keep' and 'bear'.
Can I get my SCOTUS seat now?

By definition the term "to bear" also implies "to use".

 

[Ernie S.]

OP-Sure, if you disarm it.

See "Tank", with James Garner. You don't need a gun to do a lot of damage...lol

I believe to BEAR arms you have to be able to at least CARRY them LOL

For someone with your limited mental capabilities... yeah, you would only comprehend just one aspect of the definition of "to bear".

That was Oddball's point. I done schooled him on further definitions and he hasn't been back. Doesn't matter anyway since the Amendment reads "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms", so "keep" is already there.

Notice it doesn't say "use" Arms though. Just 'keep' and 'bear'.
Can I get my SCOTUS seat now?

Not til tomorrow night about 9.

 

[Ernie S.]

Deranged NaziCon logic...

Deranged

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How about nuclear weapons?

Is the reasoning sound not to have those available and/or otherwise accessible to citizens?

Why/why not?

You do understand that it is perfectly legal for private citizens to buy/sell/own tanks, don't you? If you don't want to be free I am quite certain you can find some place where they are happy to take in more slaves, I prefer to live free, because I was born free.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu3rsha1ZtI]Kid Rock - Born Free [OFFICIAL VIDEO] - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What makes you think I don't own a tank?

He thinks he knows everything.

 

[bodecea]

How about nuclear weapons?

Is the reasoning sound not to have those available and/or otherwise accessible to citizens?

Why/why not?

Shawn Nelson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia