Those on no fly list shouldn't be able to own guns?

[POP]

Yes, but none that could hold multiple rounds or kill many people quickly.

So what? The reason the founders put the 2nd amd. in was to be able to fight off tyranny by the govt. They would gladly except possible shooting with semi-autos to keep tyranny at bay if presented with the choice.

As a matter of fact, the founders would probably even want the citizens to have access to fully automatic weapons as well.

 

[Troglodyte]

So what? The reason the founders put the 2nd amd. in was to be able to fight off tyranny by the govt. They would gladly except possible shooting with semi-autos to keep tyranny at bay if presented with the choice.

As a matter of fact, the founders would probably even want the citizens to have access to fully automatic weapons as well.

So what? Our government has a lot more than fully automatic weapons, that's what.

I'm not so sure they wouldn't have preferred to limit the arms the government has than let the people have the same.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Let's outlaw the profiteering from gun sales, by outlawing the private manufacture of guns.
We can set up our prisons to manufacture guns and issue our citizens free guns.

That would be quite ironic, that the prisoners would be making the guns the citizens can use
to protect themselves from these same prisoners when released.

 

[jitter77]

So what? The reason the founders put the 2nd amd. in was to be able to fight off tyranny by the govt. They would gladly except possible shooting with semi-autos to keep tyranny at bay if presented with the choice.

As a matter of fact, the founders would probably even want the citizens to have access to fully automatic weapons as well.

The government has tanks, naval destroyers, nukes, strike drones too. It is asinine to think citizens should have access to all this. I can see a bunch of drunk people sitting there playing around with their strike drones. Or someone who went off the deep end driving around town with a tank...

 

[Superman]

Yes, but none that could hold multiple rounds or kill many people quickly.

that is true.
please tell me why Group A should have all types of weaponry while being paid by Group B and why Group B should have limited weaponry, even though they support Group A.

 

[Superman]

The government has tanks, naval destroyers, nukes, strike drones too.

in view of this, what harm can a little ol AR-15 do?

 

[ark steel]

The government has tanks, naval destroyers, nukes, strike drones too. It is asinine to think citizens should have access to all this. I can see a bunch of drunk people sitting there playing around with their strike drones. Or someone who went off the deep end driving around town with a tank...

and to take down the citizens it should be exactly that obvious. Look up Philadelphia MOVE bombing by police. Everyone should see it happen and everyone should be standing up against it.

And you assume all of the military would follow the orders to use those on US civilians.

 

[POP]

So what? Our government has a lot more than fully automatic weapons, that's what.

I'm not so sure they wouldn't have preferred to limit the arms the government has than let the people have the same.

They would PREFERED that we didn't spend half of every tax dollar on death efforts and debt.

They wanted nothing to do with foreign wars whatsoever. They knew it was a scam.

They would have had a military capable of defending out own country and nothing more, like the Swiss, and most of the rest of the world.

Their philosophy was to be friends with everyone and not take sides in wars.

They would have us spending no more than 25% of what we do now on military.

 

[POP]

The government has tanks, naval destroyers, nukes, strike drones too. It is asinine to think citizens should have access to all this. I can see a bunch of drunk people sitting there playing around with their strike drones. Or someone who went off the deep end driving around town with a tank...

Who do you think pays for all that military stuff?

And it wouldn't be a head-on-head fight, where tanks come into play.

There are 300,000,000 guns in the US.

 

[Troglodyte]

that is true.
please tell me why Group A should have all types of weaponry while being paid by Group B and why Group B should have limited weaponry, even though they support Group A.

To protect us from the tyranny of another government we would surely succumb to if they didn't have such weapons.