Forum members who support "reasonable gun control"

[45_auto]

The myth is one of face to face combat, civilian armies standing their own trading shots one on one with the military with comparatively small numbers of rpg's, mortars, and grenade launchers being the equalizer against ground to air attacks, bombardments by naval vessels, precision guided missile strikes... the types of attacks that would actually happen if there was a serious, no holds barred us vs. them revolution.

Isn't that exactly what happened in Afghanistan? I've never seen any references to the Afghanistan Army, Air Force, Navy, or Marines. Do you have links to any information on them?

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

Isn't that exactly what happened in Afghanistan?

No, that is not how they are fighting.

 

[silicosys4]

45;
No, it is not. Not even close
You brought it up, so I trust if you are interested you can find your own links that either prove or disprove...whatever it is you are trying to prove.
I do know this...Afghanistan is landlocked, so there is probably a reason you haven't heard about their navy. If you haven't heard about their army or air force.....Sorry, can't help you there. They exist and they fight Afghani insurgents. That's a pretty easy one for you to verify on your own.

 

[happygeek]

Unpopular, but I think we should keep the 1934 NFA, '68 GCA and some parts of the AWB and other acts.

Why? Simply this: For better or for worse, technology has advanced to the point where an individual small arm can literally project the firepower of a squad or platoon, quickly and effectively, at minimal cost. Used "correctly", these are essentially toys. Hobbies.

Misused, these can kill dozens or even hundreds of people quickly and easily, with relatively minimal preparation and effort. That's simply not feasible with a bolt-action rifle or a revolver or a handgun. There is a difference between my Mosin and a hot new M4 in terms of firepower, and although I do think we should be able to own semiautomatic weapons, I think that the access to them should be controlled.

Not trying to insult anyone's intelligence, but there was a lot more than Mosins available for mail order in 1967, there was even real weapon of war, as issued, detachable magazine fed, semi-auto rifles.

 

[AlexanderA]

In regard to the relevance of the 2nd Amendment in a revolt or civil war, it's practically a given that in such a scenario, the "official" military would be divided. It could hardly be monolithic in the face of such a widespread societal disruption. Therefore the role of armed civilians would be crucial in the early stages of such a conflict, at least until things started to sort themselves out.

History shows that so-called "overwhelming force" on the side of the government does not always decide the issue. If the civilians are armed to begin with, they have a better chance. If nothing else, their pre-existing arms enable them to raid the government armories in order to get more.

 

[USAF_Vet]

History also shows that artillery in the hands of private citizens can work wonders in ousting a foreign military force. Or more accurately, the occupational force of legitimate government.

 

[1911 guy]

Quote:
The forefathers weren't envisioning billion dollar attack fighters and ballistic missile submarines when they envisioned civilian parity with the military.

That's right. All they knew was flintlocks and black powder. So, obviously, anything else is not protected by the 2A. All your cartridge arms are illegitimate. Confiscation begins tomorrow.

If the only obstacle to me owning a fighter jet is money, my rights have not been violated. I just need a better paying job. I can't afford the taxes and maintenance on a multi-million dollar house. But I was able to buy a house that fit my needs and budget. Nobody told me I wasn't allowed to buy a house.

Your if-then logic is flawed if taken to its logical conclusion. Your premise is that if parity isn't possible, then the means to achieve parity must be made illegal.

If you look at crime rates prior to 1934, we have the same situation as now: A relatively small minority of the population committing the majority of the violent crime. Bear in mind that this was also the days when you could mail-order a Thompson submachinegun. The same government that got Al Capone for tax evasion because they were too incompetent to make any other charges stick decided to violate the Constitution to "make sure it didn't happen again".

 

[silicosys4]

History also shows that artillery in the hands of private citizens can work wonders in ousting a foreign military force. Or more accurately, the occupational force of legitimate government.

Really?
When?
anytime in the last 50 years? 100?

 

[Robert]

Yeah this is done. This thread went absolutely off the rails. I should have been more clear in my request for citation. I was asking about an ND with legally owned RPGs in the US. My fault. Either way this is done.