Another failed campaign promise

PriddyBoy

Junior
May 29, 2001
17,174
282
0
But there are always lines that blur when taking such a literal interpretation of the great doc. I agree, everyone should be allowed their one shot muskets. Outside of that, there is an interpretation of what arms means, and the extent of protection offered by our Constitution. Anti-aircraft weapon systems aren't protected by the constitution, right? So there are indeed lines already drawn.
 

rog1187

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
69,746
4,973
113
But there are always lines that blur when taking such a literal interpretation of the great doc. I agree, everyone should be allowed their one shot muskets. Outside of that, there is an interpretation of what arms means, and the extent of protection offered by our Constitution. Anti-aircraft weapon systems aren't protected by the constitution, right? So there are indeed lines already drawn.
A one shot musket is your interpretation of what arms means
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
But there are always lines that blur when taking such a literal interpretation of the great doc. I agree, everyone should be allowed their one shot muskets. Outside of that, there is an interpretation of what arms means, and the extent of protection offered by our Constitution. Anti-aircraft weapon systems aren't protected by the constitution, right? So there are indeed lines already drawn.
And you can legally purchase AAA if you possess a Class III weapons license. What's your point? By the way, a Class III license comes with the requirement to waive your 4th amendment. Basically, it means that the ATF can come and search your house without due process.

The intent of the 2nd as laid out in the Federalist papers was not for personal protection. It was to allow the populace a means to defend against a tyrannical government should the need arise.

Specifically though, you didnt really address a single point I made.
 

rog1187

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
69,746
4,973
113
Have you seen one actually operated?
Does he have to...the point is that there were guns like this (and other examples) before and during the 2nd amendment...the concept of a repeating rifle was there so you can't use the argument that it was based on a single shot musket.
 

PriddyBoy

Junior
May 29, 2001
17,174
282
0
Have you seen one actually operated?
No, and I wouldn't doubt it if it jammed by round 4, but the concept is obvious. It may work perfectly as far as I know. You don't just fire guns like that. That would be like taking the Wright Bros. plane on a joy ride. Is your question driven by curiosity or do you have point?
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
No, and I wouldn't doubt it if it jammed by round 4, but the concept is obvious. It may work perfectly as far as I know. You don't just fire guns like that. That would be like taking the Wright Bros. plane on a joy ride. Is your question driven by curiosity or do you have point?

It has the ability to fire a round once about every ten seconds. It is not really a valid argument against making people think there were other big bad and scary looking guns other than muskets.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
It has the ability to fire a round once about every ten seconds. It is not really a valid argument against making people think there were other big bad and scary looking guns other than muskets.
And yet handguns account for 90% of shootings. Why are you all focused on "big bad and scary looking guns"?
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
And you can legally purchase AAA if you possess a Class III weapons license. What's your point? By the way, a Class III license comes with the requirement to waive your 4th amendment. Basically, it means that the ATF can come and search your house without due process.

The intent of the 2nd as laid out in the Federalist papers was not for personal protection. It was to allow the populace a means to defend against a tyrannical government should the need arise.

Specifically though, you didnt really address a single point I made.
Ok Dog. The points you made:

1) I don't know the laws.
Ok, I was aware of the fact that convicted felons could not legally own firearms. But I'm not aware of the process in place for licensure to any legitimate extent. I was trying to identify the areas where increased strictness is needed (I was asked). I also think that proper safety should be enforced.

2) driving and owning a gun are not comparable
I get that argument (obviously). But it's the process of being licensed and the loss of that license that I see as similar. "Can't be compared", sure but I know I would shim the shimmy sham if someone ever tried to tell me I couldn't drive again. Also, one can surely drive without a license, but it subject to even harsher penalties if they do. There are similarities in the process. Privilege versus a right? I don't see it so defined.

3) think about the presence of guns as the deterrent of tyranny
Best point you made in my opinion. I'd like to see this argument a little more from the gunners. I'd argue that ones mind is the greatest weapon against oppression, and organization is the best deterrent of tyranny. But it's a solid point that deserves its power to echo. Again, I'm not for the confiscation of guns.

4) ATF kicking in your door.
I'd always be against invasion of privacy. But if registered (yes registered = licensed) as a gun owner, I think being subject to random safety inspection wouldn't be too great an imposition. I've know two people that lost siblings at young ages due to home gun accidents. And I had a rifle pointed at me at 10 and a revolver pointed at me at 15.....all as jokes, but the danger is there when kids play. There should be a standard of safety that is revered just as much as the spirit of ownership (maybe there is?).
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
But there are always lines that blur when taking such a literal interpretation of the great doc. I agree, everyone should be allowed their one shot muskets. Outside of that, there is an interpretation of what arms means, and the extent of protection offered by our Constitution. Anti-aircraft weapon systems aren't protected by the constitution, right? So there are indeed lines already drawn.

Well that didn't take long. Eventually everyone goes to the "Well can you own a tank" argument.

What's an "anti-aircraft" weapon system consist of?
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,572
755
113
Bottom line is bottom line......pussies hate guns. Go sew a quilt nancy boy fahggs.
 

rog1187

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
69,746
4,973
113
Well that didn't take long. Eventually everyone goes to the "Well can you own a tank" argument.

What's an "anti-aircraft" weapon system consist of?
Actually during colonial times I think people had the ability to own their own cannons...not the same as a tank but still pretty lethal I would think...especially if it was loaded with canister shot.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
Well that didn't take long. Eventually everyone goes to the "Well can you own a tank" argument.

What's an "anti-aircraft" weapon system consist of?
You can own a tank. They make that argument and don't even realize how ridiculous they sound.
 

Snow Sled Baby

Sophomore
Jan 4, 2003
44,531
114
53
Another senseless school shooting and another child dead with one more critical. I thought Trump was going to end this. He promised. I thought a stupid Muslim travel ban on refugees would make America safer. Guess not. Wrong target. Oh, I know. Follow the NRA's line of ******** that you nuts are brainwashed into believing. We need more guns. Hell, put them in schools to protect against grizzlies.

MAGA. You are a bunch of fools voting for anyone that supports the NRA. Period.
wow...just wow......I have my father's WW2 pistol upstairs....unregistered....am I a scum too....should I turn myself in or just use the unregistered pistol and end it all?
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
Question on that - can you get the shells to fire? Always wanted to drive a tank.
Not sure about the sabot rounds but you waive your 4th amendment right to due process. Essentially, if you have the money and go through the process, you can pretty much have anything you want.

I knew a guy named Brightwell that owned a railroad caboose that he converted into an apartment on his farm. Chris Kline owns a fully functional maw deuce (M2 .50 cal crew served, tripod mounted, belt Fed, machine gun) that they will take out and chew the hell out of an old VW bug.
 

WVUBRU

Freshman
Aug 7, 2001
24,731
62
0
wow...just wow......I have my father's WW2 pistol upstairs....unregistered....am I a scum too....should I turn myself in or just use the unregistered pistol and end it all?
Way to add a stupid comment to a legitimate conversation for no purpose whatsoever.
 

Airport

All-Conference
Dec 12, 2001
81,917
2,060
113
Not sure about the sabot rounds but you waive your 4th amendment right to due process. Essentially, if you have the money and go through the process, you can pretty much have anything you want.

I knew a guy named Brightwell that owned a railroad caboose that he converted into an apartment on his farm. Chris Kline owns a fully functional maw deuce (M2 .50 cal crew served, tripod mounted, belt Fed, machine gun) that they will take out and chew the hell out of an old VW bug.
What gun do the seals have on those rubber inflatable boats that were used in Act of Valor? I beleive the thing spins when it fires.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
I'd vote against it the next HOA meeting
HOA meeting? Very discriminatory organization. Shouldn't people who come from low income areas be allowed to throw **** all over their yards like they previously did? I mean, you're trying to hold some standards of decency? Better be careful, you might trigger someone.
 

mneilmont

Sophomore
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
As an observer only of this thread, how many on here own firearms, how many have carry permits? Now, who the *** has required mentality to be so engaged? I see a lot of pot or kettle, damned few with temperament to own or carry.

Just a friendly observation.
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
HOA meeting? Very discriminatory organization. Shouldn't people who come from low income areas be allowed to throw **** all over their yards like they previously did? I mean, you're trying to hold some standards of decency? Better be careful, you might trigger someone.
Yeah, I was against HOAs before buying my current home. Then I discovered, with very little time dedicated to it, I could have remarkable influence on the decisions of the board....I could be ON the board....and it all was in an effort to maintain my homes value, while forcing lazy people in the neighborhood to do things like cut their grass, paint their houses....one home actually had their down spouts disconnected (and where unaware that it was bad for their basement and home).

People love to ***** and moan, but don't really like to DO anything.......I've discovered.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
46,689
1,758
113
Yeah, I was against HOAs before buying my current home. Then I discovered, with very little time dedicated to it, I could have remarkable influence on the decisions of the board....I could be ON the board....and it all was in an effort to maintain my homes value, while forcing lazy people in the neighborhood to do things like cut their grass, paint their houses....one home actually had their down spouts disconnected (and where unaware that it was bad for their basement and home).

People love to ***** and moan, but don't really like to DO anything.......I've discovered.
You basically just listed my reasoning for not caring for unchecked handout programs.
 

Snow Sled Baby

Sophomore
Jan 4, 2003
44,531
114
53
Way to add a stupid comment to a legitimate conversation for no purpose whatsoever.
you call ME stupid after all this drivel you have posted here?....What's happened to you Bru?....did the election results set you off that much?