• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Assault weapon ban

Of course, because if we don't terrorists and criminals are gonna be rolling down the streets in tanks with uzi's, just wait until this lets them get their hands on nuclear weapons.

It's true...I heard it on the news.

No wonder people are so utterly uninformed. The news is a regular puppeteer of stupidity. Why haven?t they talked about the things that this 'assault riffle' ban actually entails. Like larger ammo clips, bayonet mounts, collapsible stocks, flash suppressors, etc? The majority of the public out there truly thinks that this law is going to somehow legalize automatic weapons again.

 
I bet that if it is extended, states will make individual laws.
I know they are illegal in Colorado
Click to expand...
I think you mean expired, and you are correct. State legislatures will start pushing their own CA style bans. Some will succeed, some will fail. As for CO, I don't think they have any "assault weapon" goofiness on their books.
 
If you really want to have the priveledge of using an assalt weapon,
just join the Army or Marines, enough said.
You don't need one to hunt deer, just people.
 
Can you define assault weapon?
Click to expand...

It's a type of weapon which those who nothing about want banned, and those who have absolutely no need for want to buy.

However, if you're serious about the question, as defined by the AWB law it's a semi-automatic firearm which whose original design called for fully automatic or burst fire; is typically chambered in a relatively light caliber; because of its design allows for a higher ammunition capacity to be utilized if one cares to (which requires purchase of an increasingly awkward and impractical magazine as capacity scales); has military features such as a bayonet lug which both utterly harmless and utterly pointless for a civilian buyer; and an incredible knack for attracting an unwarranted amount of attention from both opponents and proponents.
 
Originally posted by: sward666
The right of the people to hunt deer shall not be infringed.

Was that what the framers really meant?
Click to expand...

of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
 
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: sward666
The right of the people to hunt deer shall not be infringed.

Was that what the framers really meant?
Click to expand...

of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...

of course, if you protest against the government, you are unpatriotic.
 
Originally posted by: XZeroII
of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm sure assault weapons will do good against a M1A1 tank.
 
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: sward666
The right of the people to hunt deer shall not be infringed.

Was that what the framers really meant?
Click to expand...

of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...
Just for the record, that was a rhetorical question.
 
When will we be able to change votes? Mine should have been no, but it it had the selection dotted rectangle on no, but the radio button selection was still yes...what is that?
 
Terrorists and criminals are going to get them rather they are legal or not, If more citizens are armed terrorists and criminals are going to have a harder time doing there dirty deeds.
 
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: XZeroII
of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm sure assault weapons will do good against a M1A1 tank.
Click to expand...


It's doing well for the insurgents in Iraq.
 
Oldman420, might want to not think its always 420 and put it down and at least know the laws of your state before you ASSume what they are. Straight from the morons over at the Brady Campaign of idiots Brady Morons

ASSAULT WEAPONS
Are there limitations on assault weapons and magazines? No

Colorado - No state restriction on the sale or possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons like the AK47 and Uzi. Assault weapons are as easy to buy as hunting rifles. No restriction on the sale or possession of rapid-fire ammunition magazines that can fire up to 100 bullets without reloading. Federal law does prevent the sale of some assault weapons and rapid-fire magazines manufactured after 1994, but the federal law will sunset in 2004 unless Congress and President Bush renew it.


All this bitching about something that doesn't even need to be worried about. If you don't want to buy guns then don't, as I don't choose to break the law and smoke weed or do drugs so I don't.
 
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: XZeroII
of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm sure assault weapons will do good against a M1A1 tank.
Click to expand...

What kind of an argument is that? "Well, we're sure to lose the fight anyway, so we might as well give up our rights." Seriously, think about what you said.
 
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: XZeroII
of course not. The second amendment was put in there for one primary reason. To protect us (the citizens) from our own gov't.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm sure assault weapons will do good against a M1A1 tank.
Click to expand...

What kind of an argument is that? "Well, we're sure to lose the fight anyway, so we might as well give up our rights." Seriously, think about what you said.
Click to expand...

Not to mention it's wrong. History is filled with conflicts in which rag-tag citizens with small arms defeated major armies.

Afghanistan vs the USSR is one prime example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top