Opinion: how powerful of a weapon should be legal?

[Werewolf]

but seriously, as a person who drives over bridges and has the occasional need to fly commercial, I really would rather not have shoulder fired AA missiles, RPGs and high explosives sold over the counter on a simple "cash and carry" basis.

So what you're saying is that you - well - uhhhh - don't trust us then?

 

[sm]

Kaylee touched on something I agree with...

-Not to mention " an armed society is..." .
-Keep the gummit in check
-Send a message to other gummits
- I don't do "control"," priviledge", "permisson" - well- I get uncomfortable...means people have control and can take stuff away.

Therefore, any weapon built we the people should have. Simple, to the point, no clarification needed. Don't mince , mis-quote, mis-construe anything.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Up to M-2 OK by me.

Regarding larger stuph, let that be held by the community like in the days of the olde. Cannons were stored in arsenals and ready for public use when the redcoats came. We don't want nuts (and we have no shortage of them) shooting down airplanes or taking out their neighbors.

 

[seeker_two]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but seriously, as a person who drives over bridges and has the occasional need to fly commercial, I really would rather not have shoulder fired AA missiles, RPGs and high explosives sold over the counter on a simple "cash and carry" basis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So what you're saying is that you - well - uhhhh - don't trust us then?

No. I think he means that the Stingers would be a rental...

 

[Balog]

AJ Dual: no problem. I wish I had a round of 7.62x54R for every time I've tried to write out Latin or Gaelic from memory and messed up. And that doesn't even touch on my pronunciation

 

[Orthonym]

Nuclear weapons are guarded by guys holding ordinary infantry rifles. There's your clue. Sure you can have a nuke if you can guard it all by yourself. Obviously you can't. You have to sleep some time, and there's only one of you.Also, if your nearest neighbor lived closer than 2 or 3 miles away, I betcha he'd be right nervous, even if you swore up and down that it was just a little neutron bomb, without much blast, and no fallout to speak of.

I voted for the right to own a nuke, but I don't have the resources to keep one safe from bandits and other bad guys. I don't mind an honest private citizen holding one if I know he's honest and has enough good friends or hired guys to keep the thing safe. I, of course, get to decide if my neighbor is honest and trustworthy enough to have a nuke, in consultation with the guy's other neighbors.

 

[Smoke]

I am really surprised at the number of "Full Auto" votes.

Smoke

 

[Chris Rhines]

Anything that the government owns, and then some.

- Chris

 

[The Rabbi]

One of the recurring issues (to me anyway) is accountability. So a guy passes a background check and picks up his Stinger at Missiles-R-Us and then gets laid off and decides to take out the parking lot at his previous place of employment. You can take him, charge him and send him to life or the death penalty but the fact remains that he's caused a lot ofproperty damage and doesnt have the money to pay for it.
I would say I'd support the following:
pistols: everything, with NICS check, including silencers
Rifles: Everything, as above
Full auto: something between simple NICS and what we have now but no restrictions after purchase (e.g. can move them out of state without notifying ATF)
Explosives: what we do now for full auto plus yearly bond for destructive acts. Includes vehicles like tanks.
Nuculur bums: either no or else collect enough fees to cover monthly inspection for safe handling. I mean, where are you going to practice with one anyway? Syria?

 

[NorthernExtreme]

Any weapon / Weapons System that can be carried, operated, and maintained by a team of 3 or less should be protected. And should include any Weapon / Weapons System of common issue to the Federal Military (or equivalent non-issue). Exceptions should be granted for any Weapon / Weapons System already in possession and munitions already in possession. And any Weapon / Weapons System of common issue to the Federal Military should be made available to the citizen Militia without restriction and at reasonable price.


Should allow any ammo / munitions that can be stored for 2 years (at room temp and dry environment) without the need to be repackaged or have the packing inspected, Or need radioactive shielding or Chem. /Bio protection (no Nukes or Chem./Bio). (Should only include munitions of common issue to Federalized Military and not restrict any munitions [conventional] issued to the Federalized Military from possession)

This may give and advantage to the "enemy" in some respects. But if the enemy is domestic; I doubt they could repel the numbers of citizens (so armed) even with the larger weapons, and I suspect there would be enough internal resistance in the military (refusing to conduct military operations against freedom-fighting Americans / refusing to support a Tyrannical/Oppressive Government) that the military would be held in check for the most part. Therefore allowing the efforts of the citizens to proceed without the need for Nukes, Chem. /Bio, Tanks, War ships, Plains, and large Artillery.

At the same time the citizens would realize that the effort would be tough (fighting government supporting troops and equipment) and require extreme sacrifices from them. Therefore insuring the citizens only act when the need is real and needed. Civil rebellion should never be taken lightly or without extreme need, nor be made a futile action due to restrictions placed on the People. The Voting process SHOULD take care of the rest.

If the Enemy were foreign; it would allow the people to possess weapons that could reasonably be used to repel invasion (sporting firearms have little or no practical use here), and give the military enough time to support/reinforce the American civilian/Militia forces. Or allow activated Militia/citizen forces to assume a limited military roll to support federal forces in the fight against foreign threat.

After all, this accurately represents the roll of the Militia, and the intent of the 2nd Amendment! (IMO)

 

[WilderBill]

I voted in the anything short of nukes range.
I beleive that is enough to give our, or any other government reason to think twice before doing anything that might be considered as threatning.

While most of us, most of the time, don't really need a whole lot of firepower, there are exceptions.
Take home invasion, for instance.
Most of us would be well served by a short shotgun.
However, it depends on the invaders. I know of some folks down in Waco that had a real need of stingers and anti-tank weapons to repel an armed home invasion.

Also, it seems like it would be great fun to own a 37mm anti-tank gun.
Of course, they are usless against a modern tank, but could be towed behind the family car to a remote location and maned by a crew of one.
Maybe a suitable target would be a rock on the side of a hill at 1,000 yards?

 

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

I think the FA/Burst MP5/MP10 would be much nicer than a short shotgun for home invasion. Actually, several

 

[tyme]

Practicality and cost limit ownership of nuclear weapons better than laws ever could. If antimatter weapons become practical and antimatter is abundant, will laws help the situation?

 

[artherd]

I think that we as indivuduals should be able to own anything that any Sovrign Nation should be able to own.

This basically means everything that can be used effectively withought causing long-term after effects. (particularily those which would out-last the lifetime of the weilder.

Yes, that means I'm against the ownership of Nukes, chem, bio, etc by Sovrign Nations as well. (perfect world scenario, I'm also NOT for say just the US dumping it's nukes. It has to be everybody.) Anti-matter weapons are fine, they're just as punchy, but don't ???? up ground zero for TEN THOUSAND YEARS!



The list of people able to own, say, an aircraft carrier, is a small one. Unemployed Joe Bimbo who keeps gas cans next to his hot-water-heater will not have one.

One of the recurring issues (to me anyway) is accountability. So a guy passes a background check and picks up his Stinger at Missiles-R-Us and then gets laid off and decides to take out the parking lot at his previous place of employment. You can take him, charge him and send him to life or the death penalty but the fact remains that he's caused a lot ofproperty damage and doesnt have the money to pay for it.

You think so? Stingers cost $40grand.

Like it or not, expensive weaponry makes sure that the owner generally has a lot to loose by it's potential mis-use. You don't knock over 7-11s with a $40grand weapon because you can't support your crack habbit. But you may one day have to use it to shoot down, say, a hellicopter that wants to touch down on your roof, land 8 guys and abduct your family and ransome them back to you for $600million. (valid self defense concern.)

The world is a big place, what may not seem 'valid' or 'reasonable' to expect happen to you, may be just that to someone else.


Full Auto machineguns (~$10k each) are much the same. there has been only ONE crime commited with a legal full-auto. It was by someone who actually did NOT PAY for it (if I recall correctly. Actually, it may have been a post 86 gun?) In any event, the man was an off-duty LEO performing a *contract killing*.

I'd consider accepting the ban of any weapon that the government also bans for its own self.

Well said!

I am only for Nations ownership of nukes in the current geo-political arena, as they are the 800lb gorrillas.

If say anti-matter charges existed that were a bigger (more effective/powerful/supior/etc) gun, I would toss out the nukes and their 10,000year bagage very quickly.

 

[mercedesrules]

And, the correct answer is:

Anything that the government owns, and then some.

- Chris (Rhines)

MR

 

[meathammer]

I voted anything conventional. This is what my heart feels. What my gut tells me is what will happen when the first mental giant has an AD in his garage with an RPG, or lobs a mortar round into his neighbor's house.

If everyone was responsible and safe it could work. I'm feeling a little conflicted on this one. There would have to be some guidelines obviously and strict penalties for misuse.

Nukes, no way.

 

[braindead0]

Anything the Gov't has..

I voted anything conventional. This is what my heart feels. What my gut tells me is what will happen when the first mental giant has an AD in his garage with an RPG, or lobs a mortar round into his neighbor's house.

They already do, by not properly maintaining natural gas lines and the like. We had a house blow up near cleveland that would have rivaled an RPG...more like a satchel bomb.

We trust the idiot at the gas station to not drop a lit match into a 90% empty in ground fuel tank (that'd blow really nice I'd bet)....

As far as explosive and the like, face it.. who doesn't know where to get the necessary information to make improvised munitions? The criminals already have access to high explosives whether we like it or not.

I think nukes should be okay too, in fact.. the Army could hold a nuke sale monthly to help support themselves...

 

[MeekandMild]

All nukes ought to be illegal, including those possessed by the state. World wide.

Malone, IMHO all nukes should be converted for use as drive engines for interplanetary spacecraft. But then it would raise the question of how big of an asteroid could an individual person own.

 

[Bruce H]

The reason Stingers cost 40K is the government is the only buyer. Open it up to everybody and competition would take over. Wally world for $99 all day everyday.

 

[fastbolt]

Okay folks ...

If even a small percentage of you are EVER allowed to possess the choices you indicated, I'm moving to parts far, far away. Not that you'd mind, I'm sure.

I mean, it's incredibly dangerous just driving down the roads with most of the people that are given drivers licenses nowadays, and "allowed" to own the large, not-easily-damaged-by-regular-cars SUV's & trucks ... and the high speed, high powered "performance" motorcycles, cars & trucks. Egads! And I'd like to get away from most of THEM when I retire ... so I can use MINE in peace, of course.

Now, you want to give them nuclear capability?!?

 

[tyme]

braindead0, the batf puts out a useful list for anyone seeking to make explosives.

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/listofexp.htm

All you have to do is figure out how to get those compounds without a LEUP.

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

Malone, IMHO all nukes should be converted for use as drive engines for interplanetary spacecraft.

Sounds good to me. As long as they're kept parked outside of the van Allen belt.