Should America ban AUTOMATIC rifles?

[Anonymous 7]

PistolPete wrote:

I don’t believe it was box/mag fed. It sounds like a chain/belt fed weapon.

Thx Pete. This is what I was thinking but I don’t have any experience with full auto.

[Old RottweilerParticipant 1520]

If you ban guns, bad people will use, and have used recently:

1) Moving Vans
2) Semi Trucks
3) Cars
4) Bombs
5) Knives
6) Axes
7) Baseball bats
8) Illegal guns where guns are banned.

Banning guns is just to keep the leadership safe. They have armed security, you don’t. An armed citizen might be a free man. A disarmed man is a slave.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Sound familiar?

[Silver FoxParticipant 2766]

Possibly the shooter was using something like an AK with a drum magazine (60-70 rounds). But I agree it didn’t sound like an M16 with a standard 30-round mag.

It’s also possible he was using some kind of bump-fire mechanism or device.

"Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife." --Apostle Paul

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

PistolPete wrote:

Heller deals with firearms NOT associated with military use, and is specifically limited to the “law” in DC.

True. I just quoted part of Heller where SC did discuss automatic weapons, i.e. tipped their hand about how they might rule on automatic weapons, etc.

[Anonymous 42]

Banning “semi automatic rifles would be cruel to animals being hunted, some times they’re only wounded and a spurt of rapid fire is needed immediately to put the animal down, or be JFK good with a bolt action to finish a wounded animal shocked and running.

Plus they sound cool! They’re not “assault rifles” they’re gas repeater semi automatic rifles, no such thing as an assault rifle, they’re the same as automatic handguns, and handguns are an assault weapon if anything. You can’t hunt with a hand gun, you can only blast s~~~ close to you, and that’s close range combat assault. Try shooting an attacker from an sub compact automobile with a riffle that’s in the back seat.

[Anonymous 3]

PistolPete wrote:

The government should be afraid of us not the other way around.

That would be a real democracy, government doing what the people of the nation want on an average. But it won’t happen anywhere, there is not even some vote on important questions. (Also, look at Catalonia, s~~~ happens when people want to vote on something the big government does not like.) The more power the politicians have the more they can increase their power. Ideally they want a Matrix where each human being is just something like a battery cell. Born, work and die quickly afterwards (to not require retirement payoff and health care. ) Politicians are dangerous psychos. Did ever the general public want a war, for example? No, they in fact tried their best to dodge the draft given half a chance. What is good in being forced to shoot the men of the other country who were also forced to go there to shoot us, while politicians sit in their comfortable room. all war is a man-holocaust, a crime against humanity, always started by some politicians. Did any politician die or injure at battlefield, except the ancient kings? And they are full of scandals.

[anonymousyamParticipant 4605]

Blue Skies wrote:

Personally, i think the US should ban automatic ones. All other guns should be legal, as part of the constitution.

Everything should be legal the only penalty that should exist is if you use it in a crime like it is either way,

Blue Skies wrote:

People are not allowed to carry around bombs that can kill 50+ ppl at once. So why should people be allowed to carry automatic guns that do the same?

The reason you penalize someone for carrying a bomb relies on intent most of all and again once they kill or show signs of killing you arrest them. Just carrying a bomb is not the crime here but what you are planning on doing with it.

Blue Skies wrote:

If citizens wanted to fight the government (due to corruption or some form of evil), the US military has much superior weapons than automatic rifles (such as large fleets of fighter jets). There’s no chance of winning against your own military.

That excludes anyone actually in the military as they would have access to both the weapons and the tactics. Just look at for example the kyle dinkheller shooting were a Vietnam vet used war tactics in the killing of the cop or the Dallas shooting were a vet took out multiple cops using tactics like slicing the pie.

Either way no matter what the outcome is military and guerrilla tactics are effective against governments in cases of revolt as in the end they either win or damage the government.

Just an east coast asshole who likes to curse, If you get offended by words like fuck, cunt, shit, piss, bitch or any racial slurs then you just scroll down.

[AttonParticipant]

Bans and prohibitions only work on those who care about the law. If you don’t care about human life and only care to bring suffering. The weapons needed to bring suffering are within your grasp. Guns are simple machines and can be made at home with modern cnc machines. So can flame throwers, bombs and chemical weapons give a sick son of a bitch a mission and they will find a way.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

Would more drug laws stop all drug dealers doing drugs? No

Would more murder laws stop all killers committing murder? No

So why would more gun control laws stop all shooters committing mass shootings?

[Author]

Posts