I dont “need” most of the things I own.Of course it is a right. Does that mean you are incapable of answering the question?
“Because I want to” is a perfectly sufficient answer to the question you pose here
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 dont “need” most of the things I own.Of course it is a right. Does that mean you are incapable of answering the question?
There are more of us than you might imagine. Definitely not a sufficient number to beat the whole military… but then again, I don’t believe most of the military and law enforcement members would take up arms against the general public.Riddle me this, in the next county, you see an entire Air Force equipped with F-15s and 16, acres of M-1A2 Tanks, Bradleys and if they are on a coastline, they start showing up with a small navy, do you really want that around? If they have it, they are going to use it. And get a few million killed in the process. And they are still going to lose. I wonder where you would get the trillions to do this suicide.
I won't argue that point with you. I never said you had to have a reason. As a practical matter is there any other use for high capacity and volume firearms, other than self defense?The exact point I’m making is that there doesn’t need to be a reason. I gave a couple in my first comment, but there is no need to have a reason to possess any firearm in this country.
I listed dour of them earlier in this threadI won't argue that point with you. I never said you had to have a reason. As a practical matter is there any other use for high capacity and volume firearms, other than self defense?
Your response doesn't answer the question in any way. Are you just too much of a coward to give a valid answer?I dont “need” most of the things I own.
“Because I want to” is a perfectly sufficient answer to the question you pose here
Of course it is a right. Does that mean you are incapable of answering the question?
/——-/ Long answer, it’s none of your business how people exercise their constitutional rights.Lots of talk about bump stocks and high rate of fire rifles. I understand there is a constitutional right to bear arms, but on a practical level, is there any reason for high rate of fire for anything other than self-defense? Obviously, if you are defending your home from attackers, you need that high rate of fire, and extended capacity, but are there any other circumstances where a high rate of fire and extended capacity are required?
I listed dour of them earlier in this thread
I honestly expected a quick direct answer. I expected a real gun enthusiast would know. The gun nuts here only have answers to stock questions. They only know what the NRA has told them to say.
Considering that the Second Amendment was primarily written for War, I would suggest you have your answer.nd outside of mass murder and wars, there are better weapons for what you listed available. And none of them requires a high capacity mag
I dont “need” most of the things I own.
“Because I want to” is a perfectly sufficient answer to the question you pose here
Even more accurate is you are either a coward or you can't come up with anything other than self-defense that requires high rate and capacity./——-/ Long answer, it’s none of your business how people exercise their constitutional rights.
Short answer: Fu*k off gun grabber.
Considering that the Second Amendment was primarily written for War, I would suggest you have your answer.
Then why did you ask the question? There are no stupid answers, only stupid questions.I honestly expected a quick direct answer. I expected a real gun enthusiast would know. The gun nuts here only have answers to stock questions. They only know what the NRA has told them to say.
I provided your answer.Even more accurate is you are either a coward or you can't come up with anything other than self-defense that requires high rate and capacity.
Considering that the Second Amendment was primarily written for War, I would suggest you have your answer.
Lots of talk about bump stocks and high rate of fire rifles. I understand there is a constitutional right to bear arms, but on a practical level, is there any reason for high rate of fire for anything other than self-defense? Obviously, if you are defending your home from attackers, you need that high rate of fire, and extended capacity, but are there any other circumstances where a high rate of fire and extended capacity are required?
This thread might be related to bump stocks but is about any gun with a high rate of fire. Bump stock or not.The answer is that there is no practical application of a Bump Stock unless you want to slaughter small children. The Supreme Court knows this
That is why they respond with insults