Questions for those that would ban 'assault weapons'

[RetiredGySgt]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Still no answers.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Would someone answer m14's question. He is ******* going crazy trying to figure out the answer.

Yes -- why don't you?

 

[MrMax]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

 

[jillian]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

 

[KGB]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

Wrong again. Even though the Heller decision already quantified this as an individual right, the terms "militia" & "military" are not interchangeable.

 

[MrMax]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

It's about protecting a tyrannical government? Hmmm, don't think so.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

Sorry -- still havn't seen your asnwer to the questions posed in the OP.
If you're so right, why haven't you answered them?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

This is, of course a lie.
Or abject ignorance.
I'll let you decide.

 

[zeke]

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

It's about protecting a tyrannical government? Hmmm, don't think so.

What? The 2nd can be interpreted any way you want as long as it allows more guns in the hands of those that want them.

Protect your self FROM the government or protect the government. What ever you want to do is cool as long as you don't restrict the type or amount of weapons REQUIRED to be owned by gun nuts.

 

[M14 Shooter]

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

It's about protecting a tyrannical government? Hmmm, don't think so.

What? The 2nd can be interpreted any way you want as long as it allows more guns in the hands of those that want them.

Protect your self FROM the government or protect the government. What ever you want to do is cool as long as you don't restrict the type or amount of weapons REQUIRED to be owned by gun nuts.

Still unable to answer the questions asked in the OP, eh?
Don't worry - you aren't alone.

 

[MrMax]

It's about protecting a tyrannical government? Hmmm, don't think so.

What? The 2nd can be interpreted any way you want as long as it allows more guns in the hands of those that want them.

Protect your self FROM the government or protect the government. What ever you want to do is cool as long as you don't restrict the type or amount of weapons REQUIRED to be owned by gun nuts.

Still unable to answer the questions asked in the OP, eh?
Don't worry - you aren't alone.

That's because the OP is dumb.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

This is, of course a lie.
Or abject ignorance.
I'll let you decide.

Can I pick both?

 

[WinterBorn]

What? The 2nd can be interpreted any way you want as long as it allows more guns in the hands of those that want them.

Protect your self FROM the government or protect the government. What ever you want to do is cool as long as you don't restrict the type or amount of weapons REQUIRED to be owned by gun nuts.

Still unable to answer the questions asked in the OP, eh?
Don't worry - you aren't alone.

That's because the OP is dumb.

The OP is not dumb. But it does a beautiful job of illustrating how dumb the ban was.

 

[hunarcy]

The second covers rifles, shotguns, pistols Knives swords axes and such. It does not cover missiles tanks artillery or aircraft.

Although one CAN own a perfectly functioning tank artillery piece or jet. All one needs is the proper paper work.

So you're supposed to take down a tyrannical government that has nukes, F-16s... With shotguns, knives and axes?

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

not a bunch of wackobirds thugs

At the time the Constitution was written, "well regulated" meant being in proper working order. So, the phrase well regulated militia was a militia was an effective militia.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What? The 2nd can be interpreted any way you want as long as it allows more guns in the hands of those that want them.

Protect your self FROM the government or protect the government. What ever you want to do is cool as long as you don't restrict the type or amount of weapons REQUIRED to be owned by gun nuts.

Still unable to answer the questions asked in the OP, eh?
Don't worry - you aren't alone.

That's because the OP is dumb.

I'm sorry -- don't see an answer to the questions.
Why are you afraid to asnswer them?

 

[M14 Shooter]

the 2nd isn't about protecting you FROM the government. it is about DEFENDING the government. that's why is says "well regulated militia".

This is, of course a lie.
Or abject ignorance.
I'll let you decide.

Can I pick both?

No need. She lied and she knows it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Still unable to answer the questions asked in the OP, eh?
Don't worry - you aren't alone.

That's because the OP is dumb.

The OP is not dumb. But it does a beautiful job of illustrating how dumb the ban was.

As well as the people who supported it and/or want it reinstated.
That's why they refuse to answer the questions.

 

[WinterBorn]

That's because the OP is dumb.

The OP is not dumb. But it does a beautiful job of illustrating how dumb the ban was.

As well as the people who supported it and/or want it reinstated.
That's why they refuse to answer the questions.

The best comment I have seen so far (as far as being funny) is either the claim that all semi-automatic firearms are assault weapons or that the number of rounds in a magazine determines whether a firearm is an offensive or a defensive weapons.

The ignorance concerning firearms is astounding. What is worse is the insistence that their claims are valid in the discussion of additional firearm laws.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The OP is not dumb. But it does a beautiful job of illustrating how dumb the ban was.

As well as the people who supported it and/or want it reinstated.
That's why they refuse to answer the questions.

The best comment I have seen so far (as far as being funny) is either the claim that all semi-automatic firearms are assault weapons or that the number of rounds in a magazine determines whether a firearm is an offensive or a defensive weapons.

The ignorance concerning firearms is astounding. What is worse is the insistence that their claims are valid in the discussion of additional firearm laws.

As I have said several times....
Anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.
All they've done here is prove me right.