M14 Shooter
The Light of Truth
You want to ban 'assault weapons'?
Please feel free to soundly argue you case.
For those who want to reisntate the 1994 'assault weapon' ban....? | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
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'm sorry - is that suppose to be a point?Rocket launchers don't kill people. People kill people.I see you too seek the title of village useful Idiot.We should legalize rocket launchers and grenades too. Hell, there's no reason why I can't have a few ICBM's in,my backyard. For my protection of course. And if you disagree you're a gun grabbing socialist.
Yes you gun grabbing marxistI'm sorry - is that suppose to be a point?Rocket launchers don't kill people. People kill people.I see you too seek the title of village useful Idiot.We should legalize rocket launchers and grenades too. Hell, there's no reason why I can't have a few ICBM's in,my backyard. For my protection of course. And if you disagree you're a gun grabbing socialist.
At least you're consistent in your mindless nonsense.Yes you gun grabbing marxistI'm sorry - is that suppose to be a point?Rocket launchers don't kill people. People kill people.I see you too seek the title of village useful Idiot.We should legalize rocket launchers and grenades too. Hell, there's no reason why I can't have a few ICBM's in,my backyard. For my protection of course. And if you disagree you're a gun grabbing socialist.
Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.What say you?
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.What say you?
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
Of all the legal machine guns in civilian hands,.."9/25/1985, Battle Vaughan/Miami Herald Staff: Undercover agents catalogue weapons seized, along with about 30 lb cocaine, at south Dade home. House surrounded with barbed-wire topped fence. Weapons included several rifles, shotguns, an Uzi semi-automatic carbine fitted into an attaché case; and a fully-automatic silencer equipped MAC10 machine gun,"
Plus there's the North Hollywood bank roberry which involved full auto weapons fire from the robbers.
I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.What say you?
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.What say you?
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
People do not have to show a need to have a gun.Doesn't change anything. There's no legal civilian application requiring full automatic fire. Full-auto capable weapons are tools of warfare. Don't even see a legitimate need for them in police hands.
Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.What say you?
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
Good bet that that the machine guns used ion the drug-related crimes you mention came from outside the country, not weapons stolen from legal American owners.
Point is that legal machine guns pose no demonstrable threat to anyone.Once you've robbed a bank and started shooting at police the legal status of your weapons is moot.Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.Machine guns are legal under federal law and in most states.
Of all the legal machine guns in civilians hands, only one has ever been used in a crime, and that was by a police officer.
There's no sound reason to ban machine guns from civilian ownership.
Good bet that that the machine guns used ion the drug-related crimes you mention came from outside the country, not weapons stolen from legal American owners.
Doesn't change anything. There's no legal civilian application requiring full automatic fire. Full-auto capable weapons are tools of warfare. Don't even see a legitimate need for them in police hands.
Point is that legal machine guns pose no demonstrable threat to anyone.Once you've robbed a bank and started shooting at police the legal status of your weapons is moot.Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.Seem to recall south Florida drug wars in the 80s involving rather a lot of full auto weapons fire.
Good bet that that the machine guns used ion the drug-related crimes you mention came from outside the country, not weapons stolen from legal American owners.
Doesn't change anything. There's no legal civilian application requiring full automatic fire. Full-auto capable weapons are tools of warfare. Don't even see a legitimate need for them in police hands.
Not for defense that is for sure. But what would a mass shooter do with one?
Point is that legal machine guns pose no demonstrable threat to anyone.Once you've robbed a bank and started shooting at police the legal status of your weapons is moot.Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.
Good bet that that the machine guns used ion the drug-related crimes you mention came from outside the country, not weapons stolen from legal American owners.
Counterpoint being there's no legitimate application for such weapons except in a war.
Doesn't change anything. There's no legal civilian application requiring full automatic fire. Full-auto capable weapons are tools of warfare. Don't even see a legitimate need for them in police hands.
Not for defense that is for sure. But what would a mass shooter do with one?
Oddly enough I'd rather mass shooters all used fully automatic-only weapons since then they wouldn't hit shit. No such thing as accurate full-auto fire outside of professional shooting demonstrations using recoil stabilized mods and such.
Even if true, that goes back to citing a "need" to exercise a right.Counterpoint being there's no legitimate application for such weapons except in a war.Point is that legal machine guns pose no demonstrable threat to anyone.Once you've robbed a bank and started shooting at police the legal status of your weapons is moot.Which is, of course, illegal...Fair enough. Kinda moot though, anyhing legal eventually ends up in a criminal's hands. The North Hollywood shooting used converted legal semi-autos modified to fire full-auto.I highlighted the relevant part of my post that speaks to your response.
Good bet that that the machine guns used ion the drug-related crimes you mention came from outside the country, not weapons stolen from legal American owners.