Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Full Auto ban tyranny?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by shephard19, Mar 6, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shephard19

    shephard19 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    81
    If we as civilians are supposed to be the true militia of our states shoudn't we have access to full auto? The ban on anything new after 86' is obviously intended to phase it out completely out of private hands except for the extremly rich.
     
  2. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,994
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    With this logic should we also not have RPG's and Mortars at our disposal?

    Lets return to the real world.
     
  3. BlayGlock

    BlayGlock Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    865
    Location:
    Texas
    I think it is a fair question to ask. Just where should we draw the line and why?
     
  4. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,994
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    The line has already been drawn!
     
  5. Bobarino

    Bobarino member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,625
    Location:
    western Washington
    the line may be redrawn after a series of long and drawn out court battles that find their way to the Supreme Court and maybe, just maybe, strict scrutiny will be applied and the Miller case will be applied to mean what it says about weapons in common use at the time. if it does happen that way, it will be many years in the making.

    Bobby
     
  6. Shung

    Shung Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    Geneva, Switzerland
    yeah, I like this logic.. and this logic certainly match the meaning of the 2nd amendment..
     
  7. N003k

    N003k Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    692
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but, can't we ALREADY, by jumping through similar hoops to getting a MG? Just with the added effort of jumping through identical hoops for each explosive round too. I could be wrong, don't know THAT much about the NFA...but was fairly sure that was the case...

    Also, why not?

    If you're not gonna shoot a semi auto AR-15 illegally, you're not gonna shoot a FA AR-15 illegally, you're not gonna shoot an RPG illegally, you're not gonna fire a mortar illegally, you're not gonna drive a tank/fire a tanks weapons illegally, etc, etc. Why limit what those that already obey the law can own? Especially since I'm fairly sure it's all still legal, just with annoying hurdles to jump though...
     
  8. General Geoff

    General Geoff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    5,060
    Location:
    Allentown, Pennsylvania
    Absolutely we do (or at least should).
     
  9. danprkr

    danprkr Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,337
    Yes. A full auto ban is a step into tyranny. Granted a small one, but maybe the most dangerous one in that it opens the gate to strip us of our ability to fight the next steps taken into tyranny. Until eventually there is no freedom.
     
  10. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    There is a vast difference in safety/storage requirements of smalls arms ammunition versus HE warheads.

    The antis love this attitude. If they can gradually educate (brainwash) folks into believing certain firearms are bad, they will eventually win.

    Little bites go down easier than large chucks.
     
  11. MisterMike

    MisterMike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    758
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Tyranny? Do you really feel that we're ruled by tyrants? Or is it that collectively, through democratic process, we've gotten what we asked for?

    That's a serious question . . . so often the claims of tyranny and oppression I read hear ignore the fact that we elect our legislators. Ultimately, it seems that we've gotten what we've asked for, or acquiesced to.
     
  12. Mp7

    Mp7 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,148
    Location:
    Hamburg
    i find it far fetched.

    While guns dont kill people
    unless people pull triggers ...

    with fullautos everywhere you don´t
    have to be a genius to assume it will
    not make the country safer or more democratic
    if everyone could use full auto.

    02$.
     
  13. Gouranga

    Gouranga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2010
    Messages:
    928
    Location:
    Gaston County, NC
    We have gotten here by complacency. The silent majority will always be ignored because it is silent.

    As for full auto ban. I understand where you are coming from but IMO, i have always been fine with the full auto "ban". My concern with these weapons is that they are a lot different to use properly than semis they really require the handler to have training. If I screw up with my 40 I will fire 1 single shot which is worse enough. And AD with a FA could be much worse.

    Keep in mind I live in a subdivision with lots just under 1 acre. For those who live more rural you would very likely not see the same danger in that AD as I do here. It is definitely a slippery slope. With the current FA permits you are more likely to get owners who have training in proper use. I really have not problem with FA in the hands of trained and responsible people, it is just how do you ensure that?

    To me (and I know there are folks on here who will vehemently disagree with me), there has to be a line drawn where ownership of these weapons is balanced against public safety. It is not very lightly I consider that. You can easily slide to many extremes with that mentality where everything is legal or nothing is.
     
  14. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,994
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    In reading the posts so far I see this thread is accompolishing just what it was ment to do .

    1. open a can of worms
    2. stir the pot
    3. reach no meaniful conclusion
     
  15. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
  16. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    45,673
    Location:
    Alabama
    So far........ that's certainly accurate jcwit.

    The difference between being ruled and being served is a fine one that we must guard with vigilance, else the politicians will rule us.

    Nothing different here than other times in history, except we actually started with a country where all were free. Most started out being ruled and had to take their freedom first.
     
  17. AK103K

    AK103K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,773
    You forgot #4, annoy jcwit because he doesnt agree. :)


    I agree with shephard19, as we "are" the militia, or at least we are supposed to be, although I seriously doubt we would ever be allowed to act in that capacity these days.

    Since at the time the original document was written (not that it seems to mean much these days), the Brown Bess was basically the military arm of the time, then today, there should be an M4 (as well as anything else they feel they need) in the hands of, or at least available to, every able bodied person in this country, and without any restriction.

    Technically, the '34 act was lawful, but at the same time, an end run around the Constitution. They simply taxed the guns out of the average person of the times hands with a $200 tax. The '68 and '86 bans took things into the realm of being unconstitutional by restricting and prohibiting the weapons, basically outright.

    Whats the difference in a gun thats already in the registry and one that is not, that you simply want to pay the tax on? Why cant you pay your tax and possess the gun? You'd think with the state of things, the government could use all the money it can collect.

    The whole purpose of this is control, and nothing more.

    I have to wonder why "opening a can of worms" or "stirring the pot" in respect to this is a bad thing. Seems they are valid questions that need addressed.

    Then again, I think they have a ball game on TV and beer's on sale again. ;)
     
  18. Impureclient

    Impureclient Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Location:
    Florida
    How is a full auto any more dangerous than a semi of the same variant? Is it because it can kill faster/better?
    At that reasoning anything above a .22 revolver should be banned also. Maybe we should only be allowed airguns instead.
    Actually airguns can kill also. Human beings shouldn't be trusted with any guns....even staple guns or caulk guns.

    I think it's just baby steps to take it all away.
    Step one: Take away "big, fast & mean looking" guns or charge a fortune to own them.....Check
    Step two: Limit amount of guns that are legal to purchase/own at a time.....Check
    Step three: Remove the rights to own certain guns in certain States/cities..... Check
    Step three: Limit where you can carry your gun.....Check
    Step four: Make laws that make you carry a license to carry guns.....Check
    Step five: Keep a record of gun purchases and/or make gun owners register their guns.....Almost there.
    Step six: Guns are bad, take them away.....?
    Step seven: "Eat your soylent green, sit in your cubicle and shut up Citizen number M8542Z15FL. Do you want the go back in the "calm" box again?"

    There's no such thing as making laws that give us more rights, there's only new ones that take away more of our rights slowly.
    It also is a plus for our Government to make money in the process of stripping our rights by charging a ridiculous price to access full auto as the OP said.
     
  19. Victor1Echo

    Victor1Echo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    424
    We should even have access to nukes. I think if the commom man everywhere had access to small arms in every country--there would have been no need to have developed much of the weapons we have now. The most powerful weapon is your mouth armed with the deadly bullets of truth.
     
  20. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    That's why Hughes is so silly. I can still go buy all the grenades I want, mortars,etc. Hughes didn't touch any DD's. It was political only.

    It allowed some scumbag politicians to claim they were "doing something" about guns without actually doing anything.
     
  21. EddieNFL

    EddieNFL member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,329
    Even a single round ND is too dangerous in populated areas. Firearm ownership should be limited to rural areas.
     
  22. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Evidence here that you have NO idea what you are talking about.

    There are no "FA permits", there is no additional training required to own a machine gun, the background check is not more strict. It's just a money game.

    Maybe you should go get a clue before entering the debate? It's best to have at least some minimum idea of what you are talking about before taking an anti gun position on a pro gun forum.

    Seriously, not making fun of you. You are repeating a commonly held idea but it has absolutely no base in truth. You've been told somewhere along the line that access to machine guns takes a "class 3 permit" or some other such silliness. It's just not true.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2010
  23. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,994
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    OMG!
     
  24. ATBackPackin

    ATBackPackin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,125
    Location:
    Valley Forge, PA.
    I think (hope) he was being sarcastic.
     
  25. AK103K

    AK103K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,773
    Oh, I dont know. I think many times, were our own worse enemies. I've owned full autos for 25+ years now, and I've heard some pretty stupid things from other gun owners.

    It seems that many think that by appeasing the monster by giving up my guns, they will be left alone to continue with their favorite pastime, like shooting benchrest, or trap. Why in the world would you need a machine gun? :rolleyes:

    Anyone who believes that one is worse than another, has their head someplace dark and stinky. Then again, maybe not. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page