To all you guntards.

i use my AR for hog hunting
i also use my AR for target practice, there quite acurate with the right setup
and i have a pistol and shotgun for home defence but my AR will and can do the job
no shit they arent gonna ban guns and no we shouldent have everything the military has, but at the same time if there was a war between the GOV and the people most of the military would QUIT because its there familys there gonna fight there own parents ect not gonna FLY
do i need 30 rounds at the ready, yes cause
1 its fun shooting 30 rounds off in a safe direction
2 its legal
3 hogs travel in large pack and tear up alot of farm land they can wipe a whole crop out quickly if they arent hunted
4 seeing how acurate you can get is fun
5 what people fail to realise is anything can happen to drive this country into a depresion type event, look at the economy ect. what do you think is gonna hapen when people cant afford to feed there children ? there gonna start stealing ect, you might just need 30 rounds to protect yourself and your family one day, I HOPE NOT but its better to have and not need the need and not have

i do think they should get better health care in this country and tighten up on the gun laws in place and who knows maybe add some more in to protect everyones gun rights and to possibly save a life one day.

The fair thing to do is let each person decide. And actually, that's what's going to happen......

There are actually no laws prohibiting the ownership of flame throwers.. and I do think we should have full autos and grenades..

Astonishingly ignorant post. Again for the thousandth time IT ISN'T ABOUT HUNTING OR TARGET SHOOTING.

Foolish to think they can disarm the citizens. Even the licensed ones. There are plenty of people who aren't licensed who carry so good luck.

How about improving your country and yourself so that you don't need guns? You know, like the rest of the civilized world.

Oh give up already, idiots like the OP have probably never even touched a gun. People who never see, do or understand something sure love to talk as if they do.

how about staying out of American affairs?

Right, your country allows men/women to purchase womens panties out of vending machines along with rampant child sex slave rings.

Real civilized shill.

They have to be countered.

The pharmaceuticals seem to be in all these crazys i would have a hard look at that i think the pill popping culture is the root of the problem not the guns

There will not be a ban on drugs either. Guns actually might be better...at least death is fast whereas drugs usually are a slow death.

[link to mnhopkins.blogspot.se]

I guess the civilized world has the 8th highest suicide rate in the world.

The only reason why your shitty country doesnt have guns is because we knew you couldnt be trusted with them, war crimes, unprovoked attacks, the raping and pillaging of the region about 70 years ago, kiddo.

1) We're allowed to have flamethrowers (by federal law)
2) some states allow you to possess Tannerite (as does federal law) among other explosives. Obviously there's a need to control dangerous ordnance, however, etc etc.
3) you can own tanks and armored vehicles as long as they have the ordnance removed
4) ditto with military aircraft, with the additional restriction of having hardpoints, radard (FCC rules) and certain avionics removed (ITAR, etc).

Now about that cutesy ass "nuclear missiles" remark. I hear that one brought up quite a bit. Obviously you think that nobody should be allowe d access to them, I don't think that's debatable. However, since you are using this in the context of arguing access to militarily relevant technology, let me ask you this:

SHOULD CITIZENS BE ALLOWED TO OWN TECHNOLOGY THAT IS CAPABLE OF RENDERING A STATE'S NUCLEAR FORCES INOPERABLE AND THEREFORE NULLIFYING THE UTILITY OF THOSE WEAPONS?

If you answer NO, then shut off your computer, take a sledgehammer and smash it to bits, cancel your internet subscription and never log on to the internet ever again.

I'm dead serious. It's a completely valid argument. You see, governments consider "cyber attacks" a potential threat to nuclear command, control, communications and computer systems. If you doubt this, just look at the recent stuxnet cyberweapon.

Likewise, the RSA and symmetric key ciphers that your browser uses was , not to long ago, considered a MUNITION according to ITAR, putting it in the same category as all those "scary weapons" that you listed. I guess you would have argued with the government on that one too, huh? If it were up to you, I guess e-commerce and a 100 different internet communication technologies wouldn't be allowed because they are "scary weapons".

How about you do your own industrial research and development instead of just ripping off other country's designs for everything because your cheap?
Yeah, you bastards might have cruised on that technique to build up your auto and electronics industries, but you really shouldn't have made that knockoff of the GE Nuclear reactor. With things that are important like that, it's better to do the R+D yourself so you actually UNDERSTAND the principles involved. When you copy things like that they can.............you know......BLOW UP IN YOUR FACE.

You should focus now on cleaning up all that radiation spewing everywhere from your defunct, knock off nuclear reactors.

KTHXBYE

The government doesn't want the people armed. And indeed over the last decade they have been slowly introducing more and more measures to limit civilian firearm ownership. A firearm ban won't happen over night, but what will, and has been happening, is a gradual tightening of the noose around private gun ownership. It's taking time, but it's coming.

But just to clarify, as you seem to be against so-called "assault weapon" ownership, I'd like to respectfully point out that what the media calls "assault weapons" and what assault weapons really are, are two entirely different things.

Semi-automatic AR-15's, while "scary" looking, are NO DIFFERENT from any other semi-auto .223 round.

Same with semi-automatic AK-47 variants.

Both of these things are the same as any magazine fed hunting rifle. They just have a different design, but the mechanics are the same.

People aren't going into gun stores and picking up fully-automatic firearms. Very few people will ever fire a true "assault weapon". They're a bitch to get. They have to be built pre-1987, you need an expensive tax stamp, and I believe you need to come up with a good reason for wanting it, like you're a collector(correct me if I'm wrong on that point), need to pass an EXTENSIVE background check, and not to mention the cheapest ones I've personally seen are $8,000-$15,000.

But regardless, no where in the constitution does it say "right to keep and bear arms only if they're practical for hunting and/or recreational target practice". Civilian gun ownership is the cornerstone of a fair, democratic society. The wider the gap between civilian capabilities and government/military capabilities, the bigger the opportunity for tyranny. And every tyrant in history has leveraged that fact before cementing their rule.