Obama To Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

[refugepsa91]

It is not unfair if you read this whole thread. According to many on here, ANY RESTRICTION AT ALL IN ARMS OWNERSHIP is against the constitution. That would include background checks since they could restrict someone from owning a weapon.

Is is extreme though, your question. When you begin to lump in atom bombs and missle launchers into the catorgory of "arms", which when it comes to the constitution I feel are guns...guns that you don't need a platform with wheels to transport...

Listen, the constitution is respected by law abiding citizens. When all these bans/restrictions go to far, law abiding citizens are the only ones too have their rights infringed upon.

I would hope that no clear thinking person would protest a background check...you need one to work in a medical care setting, a daycare provider needs one and so should a gun buyer.

I am not, and have never, support this ban

[Burning_Ember]

This thread has brought me to tears. Sweet, sweet tears. Of laughter.

So, let me get this straight;

1. Atomic Bombs are considered "arms".

2. No type of arms, be it Automatic Rifle or otherwise, should be banned, or otherwise restricted in sale in any way.

3. We will all conveniently forget September Eleventh, the Iraq War, the ongoing Detente with Iran, the Cold war, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the fear that has been in every era since WWII that the world would end in atomic holocaust, or that an American City would be blown up by an atomic bomb.

4. Because the Constitution is an unchangeable document where the founders probably never imagined such a weapon being available, but that's the way its written and it is your right as an American citizen to stock up all that you'd need for your own private army.

But everybody who was talking about/dodging the question of "do A-Bombs count as arms, and should you be allowed to own them", wasn't there a massive ongoing political thing about weapons of mass destruction, and people trying to get them?

[arrowfromgod]

Yet another attempt to pass legislation that is clearly unconstitutional. In my opinion, anyone that supports this ban should be brought up on charges for violating their oath to protect and defend the Constitution and impeached.

a question,

but a statement first.

I think we should be allowed to own guns, I think it is in the Constitution that we should be allowed to do so. What I dont think is that it is unrestricted free to have what ever you want.

now the question...

why does anyone need to own an assault weapon?

(I withheld the desire to ask you to show me in the Constitution where it says we can own wssault weapons )

i can agree with you i guess on that statement gator ,,, i dont need a assault rifle full auto for anything ,,, full metal jacket ammo is not a good hunting ammo ,,, the bullet dont expand and the deer run farther ,,, i have hunted with ww2 ap rounds in my old 30-06 spring field i prefer a 180 grain lead nose myself it has the shock power of a bus hitting the target,,,

ive yet to see a situation that i would need a fully automatic weapon in america ,,, with the scope i have on my browning .308 i have a sight kill range (if i can see it i can hit it) my longest head shot on a deer is 214 steps and i teach my children accurace is better than saturation,,, know thy target ,,, and eat what you kill (ppl excluded) and that to take a human life is only right if it is to preserve life ( protect the widowed an orphans)

if a army came into our area to occupie it (enemy forces) i dont think it would be to long before i had an assault rifle

the mistake the gov. is making tho is that it trying to dis arm the people ,,, every gov. before it has tryed to do this too and failed

even rome fell

and i really aint worryed about it

even now if you really wanted a m-16 you could buy it (around 1800 bucks last i heard )

this shows that the corruption with in is alive and well

im sure you see my point ,,, tho im sure the assault rifle i take off the enemy will probably be an AK47 i dont see needing one till then and by that time guns and ammo will be free because it will be laying around all over the place ...

but i hope it never happens ,,, i hope i never see the poverty of war ever again ,,, that i dont see american or any other kids prostituting themselfs for food ,,, mothers maiming there children at birth so they can beg with better results ect.ect.

in the bible it says that when the NWO comes that there will be a resistence

i pray that if im not gone by then that the lord will grant me that i die well

as some of the others have stated sir the laws they pass applie only to the law abiding citizen

for we all know that murder was still a fact after hitler disarmed germany

history repetes itself again and again

and will continue to do so untill god our father comes back to run things

[Gauntlet]

According to Webster's Dictionary, the word Arms means weapons collectively. It is not even really limited to guns. I know you withheld part of your question, but I decided to answer it anyway.

so then, it should be leagl for you or anyone who wants to do so, to own an atomic bomb?

is that what you really believe?

Constitutionally speaking, the government cannot ban me from owning any type of weapon. At the same time, the average citizen doesn't have access to an atomic bomb.

Laws to prevent people from owning weapons harm law abiding citizens. The people you have to worry about are not those individuals, but those who are law breakers. If I did have an atomic bomb in my possession, nobody would have to fear I would use it to harm innocent people. On the other hand, an atomic bomb in the hands of terrorists would be something to fear.

By the way, is there actually a law on the books banning the possession of atomic bombs? I am just curious because it never entered my mind to go out and purchase one.

Do you need one?

You should read up on what happened to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You should seek out the stories of the victims and their descendants. Respect for human life is a biblical concept, last time I checked. You're Christians, but I think you are George Bush Neocons first.

By the way, did they ever find any of Saddam Hussein's Hidden Weapons of Mass Destruction? Yeah right, a firecracker is what actually found ...

(I wouldn't be speaking out like this if I didn't feel strongly about it.)

[Gauntlet]

A few years ago, an American citizen lashed out at an out-of-control federal government.

His name was Timothy McVeigh.

[MorningGlory]

According to Webster's Dictionary, the word Arms means weapons collectively. It is not even really limited to guns. I know you withheld part of your question, but I decided to answer it anyway.

so then, it should be leagl for you or anyone who wants to do so, to own an atomic bomb?

is that what you really believe?

Constitutionally speaking, the government cannot ban me from owning any type of weapon. At the same time, the average citizen doesn't have access to an atomic bomb.

Laws to prevent people from owning weapons harm law abiding citizens. The people you have to worry about are not those individuals, but those who are law breakers. If I did have an atomic bomb in my possession, nobody would have to fear I would use it to harm innocent people. On the other hand, an atomic bomb in the hands of terrorists would be something to fear.

By the way, is there actually a law on the books banning the possession of atomic bombs? I am just curious because it never entered my mind to go out and purchase one.

Do you need one?

You should read up on what happened to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. You should seek out the stories of the victims and their descendants. Respect for human life is a biblical concept, last time I checked. You're Christians, but I think you are George Bush Neocons first.

By the way, did they ever find any of Saddam Hussein's Hidden Weapons of Mass Destruction? Yeah right, a firecracker is what actually found ...

(I wouldn't be speaking out like this if I didn't feel strongly about it.)

You may speak out strongly, Gauntlet, but you have waved a gigantic red flag while doing so. I don't believe anyone is seriously considering buying an atomic bomb here. The idea is that our Constitution doesn't make reference to ANY weapon that is prohibitied for the people. Granted, a lot of the weaponry we have today was unheard of 243 years ago. Btw, the WMD that was, or wasn't, in Iraq has nothing to do with this topic. Are you just airing your anti-American views willy nilly? If so, it's a bad idea.

[MorningGlory]

A few years ago, an American citizen lashed out at an out-of-control federal government.

His name was Timothy McVeigh.

What IS your agenda, Gauntlet? Do you think there are any of us here who don't remember McVeigh? He wasn't merely in opposition to the government; he was a true terrorist and a neo-Nazi admirer of Hitler..

[redwing]

According to Webster's Dictionary, the word Arms means weapons collectively. It is not even really limited to guns. I know you withheld part of your question, but I decided to answer it anyway.

so then, it should be leagl for you or anyone who wants to do so, to own an atomic bomb?

is that what you really believe?

gator why do you always twist things around? I do believe you've got a-bombs on the brain. no offence intended

[Gauntlet]

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

The Gospel of the NRA.

[Gauntlet]

What kind of gun would Jesus carry?