Guns, Guns, Guns. America loves Guns.

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • This is clear. Even republicans accept the court conclusions on machine gun/single shot ... repetition weapons.

    If you can ban or restrict the use one type of firearm despite what the 2nd amendment says you can do it to any type of weapon.

    Different States already have varied laws on ownership, type of weapon & where they can be used

  • Do let's see where your red lines are.

    What about private citizens owning a mortar?

    Before you say they aren't firearms here is the encyclopedia Britannica definition.

    Middle age is when your old classmates are so grey and wrinkled and bald they don't recognise you.

  • This my argument, there are already laws that restrict gun ownership,in contravention of the 2nd amendment. This unsurprising considering the that the constitution was written at a time when a musket might fire 3 rounds a minute.

    What it would seem to mean though is that a ban on machine guns is not unconstitutional then the same case could be made that a ban on semiautomatic rifles cannot be claimed to be unconstitutional

  • If you can ban or restrict the use one type of firearm despite what the 2nd amendment says you can do it to any type of weapon.

    Different States already have varied laws on ownership, type of weapon & where they can be used

    They do, you are right. The starting point is the Constitution.

    8| "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change".

  • No they don't otherwise they'd have been banned by a law passed by congress meaning the Supreme Court couldn't have overturned it.


    There is already a law preventing people from having machine guns. The regulation around bump guns was irrelevant because they are the equivalent to a machine gun. There is no point in having 2 laws for the same thing

  • There is already a law preventing people from having machine guns. The regulation around bump guns was irrelevant because they are the equivalent to a machine gun. There is no point in having 2 laws for the same thing

    They've thrown out the regulation banning bump stops. Sounds to me like you're as confused as to why they did so as I am

  • Guns don't kill by themselves. It's murderous individuals who miss-use firearms who kill and maim.. What we see in the USA is gang related murders in cities and large towns , mostly run by Democrat officials. Biden has done nothing to curb the illegal use of firearms as did Obama.. The Democrats don't want to upset their "Gangsta" voters.. ;)

    The Voice of Reason

  • No because there are other clauses in the US Constitution

    The simple fact is that Americans dont really want to kill but they are far easier with the idea of killing and guns facilitate that for them :(

  • I see nothing wrong with being able to shoot a guy who breaks into my house at 2 am.

    I don't want to call the police AFTER my wife has been raped and I have a knife wound in the chest.

    I want to this call - "Hello Emergency services"

    "Send police and ambulance I have just shot a man who entered my bedroom at 2 am waving a large knife at me - I think he is dead"

    "Are you and the residents OK"?

    "Yes, I shot him before he could harm any one of us. I have two children in the next bedroom they are shocked but alive and OK".

    I do not need a government or the College Of Policing to tell me how to protect myself and my family.

    8| "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change".

  • So now you sleep with a loaded gun under your pillow, are a very light sleeper, have the reactions of the Flash and can see in the dark !!

    if you're going to argue a case for owning a gun you could at least come up with an argument that's more likely than someone winning all 3 lottery jackpots in a week as justification

  • Lets be honest here:

    Which would you prefer;

    That you shot the trespasser at 2 am, wielding a knife, wearing a Balaclava. Or you got over your shock and phoned the police to tell them your wife had been murdered?

    8| "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change".

  • But if the intruder has a gun the likelihood is that he shoots first

  • But if the intruder has a gun the likelihood is that he shoots first

    I want better odds. I don't care about him. I have zilch concern for an intruder.

    8| "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change".

  • I want better odds. I don't care about him. I have zilch concern for an intruder.

    The usual argument made by the gun lobby in the US is that all you need to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun

    This argument completely ignores the fact that if the bad guy is intent of using his gun he’s going get his shot in first

  • The usual argument made by the gun lobby in the US is that all you need to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun

    This argument completely ignores the fact that if the bad guy is intent of using his gun he’s going get his shot in first

    He's going to shoot you anyway, unless you stand back and allow him to harm your wife.

    We all know it's a shit fest. But I am talking of survival. How the fuxx can a guy wearing a Balaclava carrying a knife, in your house at 2 am HAVE THE MORAL SCRUPLES TO CONSIDER YOUR WELL BEING??

    Pointing a gun at an intruder is enough to reverse the fear and get him to shit his pants and run away. Then you phone the police.

    I make my argument - the salient point of my argument - I do NOT want an official person or body telling me how to protect myself and my family. Police REACT they never pro-act. They only PRO-ACT for corporations.

    8| "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change".

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!