blue109 Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 the less they know what's in my safe the better. paperwork wise, the only firearms I own are a milsurp and a pink .38 revolver. plan on keeping it that way and watching forums and classified pages for firearms I want. I don't have high hopes for our future, and that NFA list will be priority when they come knocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
survivalshop Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 strange that you think select fire should be off the list while a muffler stays on. I feel there should be no NFA at all. only about 10% of my shooting is done at public ranges, but if there was no tax or hassle I am sure the vast majority of shooters would have a can. Thats not what I said or meant , the manufacture of NFA machine guns for sale to the public was halted in 1986 by law . The only ones a Citizen can buy now are ones made prior to that . That is what should be over turned . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planeflyer21 Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 Thats not what I said or meant , the manufacture of NFA machine guns for sale to the public was halted in 1986 by law . The only ones a Citizen can buy now are ones made prior to that . That is what should be over turned . AND taken off the NFA list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 There shouldn't be an effective NFA, it needs to be struck down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnatshooter Posted July 15, 2014 Report Share Posted July 15, 2014 One basic notion behind the "well-regulated militia" portion of the Second Amendment is the meaning of "well-regulated". When the Amendment was written, the phrase 'well-regulated' was in common use, and it means, for us modern people, the same as 'functional' or 'practical'. The notion behind a 'functional' civilian militia is that civilians would be able to bring their own battle-ready weapons when the need for a militia arose. They can't bring 'em if they don't have 'em. This of course suggests that civilians should have access to select-fire rifles. With respect to suppressors, the question becomes whether suppressors are used on the modern battlefield. If they are used in that way, the Second Amendment would indicate that citizens should have access to suppressors as well. The same would of course be true for magazine capacity, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachmaster Posted July 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 There should be no nfa, and the atf needs to drop the f. Can you imagine a society that was ACTUALLY a capitalist society? And ACTUALLY free? Where every can had at least 350 hp, got 50 + mpg, and was affordable? Where you could build a house and buy land off of minimum wage? What is holding us back? Ole uncle sam and all the retards that cant think for themselves. Why is the vehicle with history's best mpg an '83 civic? Is the EPA really helping the environment with emotions when every cars fuel efficiency is cut in half? Anyways, the govt ruins everything, and needs to get its hands off ALL of our firearms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtallen83 Posted July 16, 2014 Report Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) There shouldn't be an effective NFA, it needs to be struck down. AMEN Brother!!!!!!!! We hear so much about "protecting" our rights when in reality we should be struggling to regain the rights that have been taken. Edited July 16, 2014 by jtallen83 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 With respect to suppressors, the question becomes whether suppressors are used on the modern battlefield. They are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shibiwan Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) Keep the status quo. This just means that suppressors will remain overpriced and I can sell the ones I make at an insane 300% profit margin. <lmao> <laughs> Edited July 17, 2014 by shibiwan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirForceAR Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 I just find it funny that it's harder to get a silencer than the actual firearm lol. I can still kill people in loud mode lol. Shouldn't it be the other way around? I should have 20 silencers and 2 guns. Idk, guess I just look at it differently. But regardless, if you're military, a vet, Leo, etc you should be able to buy whatever the hell you want. I honestly think there should be more restrictions for civilians. Lol let the flaming begin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaRKle! Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 But regardless, if you're military, a vet, Leo, etc you should be able to buy whatever the hell you want. I honestly think there should be more restrictions for civilians. Lol let the flaming beginI've met too many LEO's who can't tell me the model or caliber of their issued pistol to think that they should have less restrictions than non-LEO/Mil folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirForceAR Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 I've met too many LEO's who can't tell me the model or caliber of their issued pistol to think that they should have less restrictions than non-LEO/Mil folks. Hey I'm not a fan of Leo period, but I didn't wanna hurt any feelings and leave anyone out lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Microgunner Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 I honestly think there should be more restrictions for civilians. Lol let the flaming begin No shiit, you really feel this way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) No shiit, you really feel this way? Quite the popularity bid, huh? Edited July 31, 2014 by Matt.Cross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edgecrusher Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Yes, please elaborate. I'd be interested to hear why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DNP Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 He knew he'd be flamed for that one.... Apparently the Air Force has left him a little holier than thou. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 He knew he'd be flamed for that one.... Apparently the Air Force has left him a little holier than thou. No kidding, I wasn't aware that there was an antithesis to Oathkeepers within the pro-2A community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Microgunner Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 So, you believe in the right to self defense, as long as you approve? On a completely unrelated topic, have any of you guys ever seen A$$HOLE spelled this way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Armory Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) On a completely unrelated topic, have any of you guys ever seen A$$HOLE spelled this way? Edited July 31, 2014 by Dane Armory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toolndie7 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 In my state its a motherfecker to get a concealed carry permit. However, if your are retired military and or LE you automatically get a free pass. WTF? What makes him or her any more "qualified" than the average educated citizen? Especially, being retired that puts you in the general population pool with no powers of authority. Typical BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirForceAR Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Oh boy where do I start lol. First off, I'm not trying to make any enemies here. I'm simply stating my opinion, which i believe I have that right seeing as how I fought for it. My point was this; there are a lot of civilians who go and buy all this tactical gear, surplus uniforms, and ARs and FNs and HKs and then they act like they're some sort of neighborhood hero or SEAL team member. Sorry, but I don't think military uniforms should be available to the public period(but that's a whole other argument haha). I know that every single branch has at least basic firearms training requirements and annual renewals as well as shooting for qualification. All I'm saying is that everyone should be required to go through training and annual re-certification to possess weapons. You cant just hop in a car and drive when you feel you're ready. You cant buy a motorcycle and just ride it when you want. those two specific examples are, I guess the closest to what I think we need. Ill die for this constitution and the rights it affords me. But I think we need to weed out the idiots that don't need to have a firearm, or license to drive. I mean, there is a state that gave a BLIND man a CPL. Seriously? whats he gonna do? spray and pray? So ill reiterate, There should be no limiting of what you can own or how many, but something should be required of you to show your competency. secondly, to the people complaining about vets or active military getting a pass on CPLs, is it right? no. But we live in a country where we give billions in foreign aid but cant even keep our own citizens and veterans off the street, so maybe that's just a small bit of karma coming back around. Like I said, its just my opinion, agree or disagree, that's all of your rights. Hope you guys all have a great day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Microgunner Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 An interesting opinion, shared by many but rarely found here. I'd much rather a few blind people receive CCW licensees than millions be hindered from the ultimate right to lawful self defense. So, as an Airman you need to prove yourself to your superiors to be trusted with a firearm. And we're supposed to do the same? Who are these superiors I'm now subordinate to? You? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirForceAR Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 An interesting opinion, shared by many but rarely found here. I'd much rather a few blind people receive CCW licensees than millions be hindered from the ultimate right to lawful self defense. So, as an Airman you need to prove yourself to your superiors to be trusted with a firearm. And we're supposed to do the same? Who are these superiors I'm now subordinate to? You? Nevermind man, You just want to argue. Having rights just to have them means nothing, but I guess that's the 21st century American way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Microgunner Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Done. If it's okay by you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt.Cross Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Nevermind man, You just want to argue. Having rights just to have them means nothing, but I guess that's the 21st century American way. That's a presumptuous reply to a perfectly valid question, which you chose to cop-out instead of answering. So I'm straight on this, inviting flaming is OK with you but valid intelligent questions aren't? Seriously, this is the first time I've seen someone carelessly doom themselves in their introductory topic. What gives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.