Big Bend Texas
Platinum Member
- Mar 14, 2022
- 9,242
- 5,230
- 893
If it has a "pistol grip" and muzzle device it would be classed as an "Assault weapon" by many proposed definitions.Says who?
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.
If it has a "pistol grip" and muzzle device it would be classed as an "Assault weapon" by many proposed definitions.Says who?
They should be but gun grabbers always start with the low hanging fruit.By that logic machine guns should be legal to own and very available...but they are not
No, just too many guns in the hands of criminals. Put them all in prison for 20 years when caught illegally possessing a gun or using one in a crime.Too many guns on the street huh...
A complete fabrication on your part. Handguns are the most frequently used firearms in school shootings.And yet ARs are the weapon of choice in school shootings...in fact in most mass shootings
Whatever is written into the legislation defining them.Flash
Like baseball bats, golf clubs and crutches?
Infringed.You have the right to own a AR-15 but the government can put the same requirements to buy it as there are on Uzi’s, so as you argue no one stop you, well you can be forced more regulations that will require you to obtain a special permit.
Want to go down that road because you can not buy whatever weapon another military is using easily and the Federal Government has certain weapons classified in different groups and if you disagree then study the requirements to own a fully automatic weapon and then realize this could be applied to weapons like AR-15’s if Congress and the Oval Office decide to do it…
Edit note: AR-15’s are not fully automatic but could face the same requirements as fully automatic weapons do…
Definition of infringe
transitive verb
1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of anotherinfringe a patent
2obsolete : DEFEAT, FRUSTRATE
intransitive verb
: ENCROACH —used with on or uponinfringe on our rights
It has been done before…Infringed.
By definition such a requirement is an absolute infringement on the right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Prior restraint on the exercise of a right is by definition an infringement.
So has slavery. That it happened before doesn't make it right.It has been done before…
Yeah, nice leap but blocked and thank Regan and George H.W. Bush and William Jefferson Clinton…So has slavery. That it happened before doesn't make it right.
Dude stop pretending modern semi-automatic weapons were anything like muskets of the 1700’s. It’s so fucking stupid. I hate how disingenuous you assholes are about this subject. Be an adult and admit some point the left makes about guns. Find some common ground.Gun ownership was higher in the 1700s than they are now.
Remember there were essentially no police until around 1900.
And the fact guns can fire more shots now, does not at all change the number of people who would be killed.
Nor would there ever be any reason to write the 2nd amendment any differently, since all it says is that the feds do not get any firearm jurisdiction at all. Which is totally reasonable, since states and cities are all very different and should write their own laws whenever possible.
And Police were around in the late 1800’s in Cities like Chicago…Dude stop pretending modern semi-automatic weapons were anything like muskets of the 1700’s. It’s so fucking stupid. I hate how disingenuous you assholes are about this subject. Be an adult and admit some point the left makes about guns. Find some common ground.
And no, gun ownership was not higher then. Quit making shit up on the spot. That’s all you’re doing.
There's no leap, wrong is wrong no matter how many names you want to drop.Yeah, nice leap but blocked and thank Regan and George H.W. Bush and William Jefferson Clinton…
Yeah, but remember once done you can do it again…There's no leap, wrong is wrong no matter how many names you want to drop.
It was far higher in the colonial era. Firearms were essential to life in the colonies particularly for the vast majority of the citizenry who lived in rural areas.Dude stop pretending modern semi-automatic weapons were anything like muskets of the 1700’s. It’s so fucking stupid. I hate how disingenuous you assholes are about this subject. Be an adult and admit some point the left makes about guns. Find some common ground.
And no, gun ownership was not higher then. Quit making shit up on the spot. That’s all you’re doing.
That's just idiotic. Did you make that up all on your own?Yeah, but remember once done you can do it again…
No, it is just reality…That's just idiotic. Did you make that up all on your own?
Shotguns still all under the assault weapon definition…What is the definition of "assault weapon?"
It's a little like porn - you'll know it when you see it. A weapon used by the military for killing people. Any gun that makes you feel like Rambo - unlike the feeling you get with a single-shot .22 or single-shot shotgun.
View attachment 650837
LinkA complete fabrication on your part. Handguns are the most frequently used firearms in school shootings.
LinkShotguns still all under the assault weapon definition…