Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/13/2001 9:22:30 AM EST
Well what do you think? I say repeal it..... -SS
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:24:06 AM EST
Absolutely...unless you are an animist.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:31:01 AM EST
I dunno, between that and the NFA, it keeps me from buying something I don't need that eats ammo like there's no tomorrow. [:)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:31:33 AM EST
That's not the ethical way to conduct a poll dude. [:)] Example: Q. Should we have a tax cut? (YES) - Even though countless children will starve in school and old people will die. (NO) - Our government is fighting a war and it needs all of the money it can muster to keep us free from evil and terrorist attacks. See the problem here? [:)] This is the same way anti-gun polls are conducted over the phone. Your "questions" are in fact comments trying to sway the voter into your line of thinking. If they disagree with you, then they are anti-Constitutionalists and unAmerican. Oh, and HELL NO. They shouldn't repeal the machinegun laws! I've lost enough money in the stock market damnit, I don't need my $8,000 M16A2 turning into a $850 M16A2 over night....thankyouverymuch. [;)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:35:53 AM EST
Just think about it! $1500 for a brand new MP5 or UZI! God Bless Texas
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:39:22 AM EST
I heard an interesting response today on a radio show that got me thinking, so here goes. Attny General Ashcroft essentially has said that the right to own weapons is supported by the 2nd ammendment to the Constitution. He has said that Federal laws trump state laws by his recent decisions that medical marijuana cannot be allowed and more recently that the right to die laws in Oregon are illegal. Can we make a leap of faith and assume that he supports federal laws over state laws regarding firearms?? If so them those of us who lve in states with very restrictive STATE firearms laws that prohibit CCW and Class 3 ownership should rattle the AG's cage over this!!
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:40:01 AM EST
Originally Posted By GodBlessTexas: Just think about it! $1500 for a brand new MP5 or UZI! God Bless Texas
View Quote
Just think about it! I paid $7,000 for my MP5. NO, NO FREAKING WAY. I LIKE THE LAW THE WAY IT IS NOW. ...could we even get M249's for $3,000? NO, NEVERMIND. LEAVE THE LAW ALONE,
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:40:34 AM EST
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:45:46 AM EST
Originally Posted By Big_Bear: Nothing unconstitutional is EVER "OK." [rolleyes]
View Quote
Sure it is, as long as the law is good for the collective. Laws against private ownership of nuclear weapons could be construed to be unconstitutional... but they protect the collective. The Second Amendment says we have a right to "keep and bear [b]arms[/b]" and a nuke is definitely an "arm".I'm sure you would agree that every looney with $40,000 shouldn't be able to buy a Russian nuke and keep it in their basement. [:)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:46:18 AM EST
Wgunn, so you would gladly give up freedoms because it saves you money? I would lose money if the '94 ban were repealed, but I would gladly give it up. It sure would be nice to buy AR15 (real) carbines for $500 like they used to be. Just imagine all the money you could make up for by purchasing new toys. Those 10 & 12,000 dollar firearms we've always wanted.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:50:41 AM EST
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Wgunn, so you would gladly give up freedoms because it saves you money? I would lose money if the '94 ban were repealed, but I would gladly give it up. It sure would be nice to buy AR15 (real) carbines for $500 like they used to be. Just imagine all the money you could make up for by purchasing new toys. Those 10 & 12,000 dollar firearms we've always wanted.
View Quote
No, I would never support such an initiative. I am a capitalist first and a gun owner second. Money reigns supreme and I would much rather have my money than freedom... as would any red blooded capitalist. "GIVE ME MONEY OR GIVE ME DEATH!"
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 9:59:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/13/2001 9:56:30 AM EST by SouthernShark]
Originally Posted By wgunn: That's not the ethical way to conduct a poll dude. [:)] [;)]
View Quote
You are correct. I should have phrased it like this: 1) Yes, repeal this Unconstitutional Law. 2) No, Keep it because I paid a lot for a machine gun and I don't want other people having a gun like mine, even though it means that in ten years or so the American civillians will be permanently deprived of machine gun ownership when these guns wear out, but the important thing is that I have one. 3) No, Keep it because Rosie Said So and she is so damn fine. 4) No, Keep it because Hillary said so and she is always right..... That would have worked eh? [:P] -SS
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:00:11 AM EST
wgunn, I hope you're kidding....if you're not, you're really an asshole. QS
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:04:14 AM EST
What if the poll said: 1. Yes, repeal the law because I'm queer and love hamsters. 2. No, keep the law because I am queer and love hamsters. How would you vote?
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:17:50 AM EST
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: What if the poll said: 1. Yes, repeal the law because I'm queer and love hamsters. 2. No, keep the law because I am queer and love hamsters. How would you vote?
View Quote
Well, being a Marine (department of the Navy) I would opt for being a queer and in love with hampsters... as long as they have dog bowls on their heads and wear those cute little bell bottom pants. [:)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:21:00 AM EST
That sounds perfectly reasonable.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:22:57 AM EST
Originally Posted By SouthernShark: 2) No, Keep it because I paid a lot for a machine gun and I don't want other people having a gun like mine, even though it means that in ten years or so the American civillians will be permanently deprived of machine gun ownership when these guns wear out, but the important thing is that I have one.
View Quote
That's the one I would choose. You're damn right I like being the only guy at the range with an MP5, M16 or whatever it is I bring that day. I like to stand out in a crowd... that's part of the allure of owning such pricey weapons... it makes you elite. I'm a capitalist, elitist, republican, cigar smoking, beer drinking, whiskey pounding, un-PC "asshole". So what? At least I have a M16A2 and [b]YOU[/b] don't! HA! See my point? I like the law, leave it alone damnit! [:)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:24:31 AM EST
Yes, and then the [b]National Firearm Act of 1934[/b] would be the next thing I'd like to see repealed! Eric The(WishfullyThinking)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:25:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By wgunn:
Originally Posted By GodBlessTexas: Just think about it! $1500 for a brand new MP5 or UZI! God Bless Texas
View Quote
Just think about it! I paid $7,000 for my MP5. NO, NO FREAKING WAY. I LIKE THE LAW THE WAY IT IS NOW. ...could we even get M249's for $3,000? NO, NEVERMIND. LEAVE THE LAW ALONE,
View Quote
I really hope you are joking. Michael
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:28:32 AM EST
Then I'll pass a law that allows me to flap my arms and fly....
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:30:37 AM EST
You're fucking dreaming. Our days as law-abiding gun owners are numbered. They don't "repeal" laws unless serves some corporate interest. I fully expect to hear more stories of woe like poor OneShot's. The definition of "terrorist" has been redefined as "anyone who doesn't agree with what the government does." They aren't going to ban more guns, they're going to put the full court press on gun owners.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:32:32 AM EST
Originally Posted By Ponyboy: I really hope you are joking. Michael
View Quote
Does it look like I'm joking Michael? [:)] I have a sizable investment, more than many of you make in a year, in my machinegun collection. Now you nancies want to whine and bitch about the laws, get them repealed just so you can screw me out of thousands and thousands of dollars, and for what? Because you want to drive a freaking Mercedes on an Escort budget. Tough titty! Play the hand you were dealt and stop screwing with my finances. God... don't any of you appreciate what it means to be a capitalist and elitist? Haven't you ever played golf and pretended to make over $250k a year? Golf is an elitist sport and so is machinegun ownership. It's not for the lowly masses. Now step off! [:D]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:33:59 AM EST
Originally Posted By Major-Murphy: Then I'll pass a law that allows me to flap my arms and fly....
View Quote
Now that makes sense. I'll support that law. That's all I'm calling for people, reasonable legislation that protects the children... and that doesn't screw with my investments.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:41:01 AM EST
Originally Posted By QuietShootr: Actually I do have NFA stuff. [-!-] What a dickhead.
View Quote
Laugh... God, some of you guys are WAY too predictable. News Flash: It's more than plainly obvious I'm kidding. Notice all of the little [:)]'s and the completely absurd arguments I use to justify my fictitious position. I'm being "facetious" because the original question and subsequent poll are ridiculous to ask here. Asking an AR15 gun board if they think we should repeal the '86 machinegun law... That's like asking a bunch of Corvette enthusiasts on a Corvette board if they should discontinue the Vette or give every existing Vette owner a free one for their support. I think we know what the answer would be in both cases... just as I could predict with 100% accuracy the results of this poll. So, I'm kidding. Relax. I would love to have the law repealed so I could load up on some really cool toys for next to nothing. I would LOVE to have the ability to buy new M16's, M249's, M240's, FN90's, G36's, etc. Who wouldn't? Laugh.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:42:31 AM EST
[size=6]IF[/size=6] the law were to be repealed, the Gov would tax them so that they cost MORE than they do now. AND the states would still have their laws. I want to fly! Pass my law!
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:43:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/13/2001 10:37:12 AM EST by SouthernShark]
Originally Posted By wgunn: I have a sizable investment, more than many of you make in a year, in my machinegun collection. Now you nancies want to whine and bitch about the laws, get them repealed just so you can screw me out of thousands and thousands of dollars, and for what? Because you want to drive a freaking Mercedes on an Escort budget. Tough titty! Play the hand you were dealt and stop screwing with my finances. God... don't any of you appreciate what it means to be a capitalist and elitist? Haven't you ever played golf and pretended to make over $250k a year? Golf is an elitist sport and so is machinegun ownership. It's not for the lowly masses.
View Quote
Another yuppie who just doesn't get it. If you have such a good job then you shouldn't worry about the loss. I bet I lost more money in the stock market last year than your little collection is worth. But am I whining about it? No. Why is that? Because I have a job and I will make more money. If you are old and about to die and need the money to live off then I guess I can see where you are coming from. But if you are young and you work, then you are just pathetic. -SS
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:43:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/13/2001 10:36:48 AM EST by Ponyboy]
all of the bad stuff I said is retracted... Michael
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:45:27 AM EST
Originally Posted By wgunn:
Originally Posted By QuietShootr: Actually I do have NFA stuff. [-!-] What a dickhead.
View Quote
Laugh... God, some of you guys are WAY too predictable. News Flash: It's more than plainly obvious I'm kidding. Notice all of the little [:)]'s and the completely absurd arguments I use to justify my fictitious position. I'm being "facetious" because the original question and subsequent poll are ridiculous to ask here. Asking an AR15 gun board if they think we should repeal the '86 machinegun law... That's like asking a bunch of Corvette enthusiasts on a Corvette board if they should discontinue the Vette or give every existing Vette owner a free one for their support. I think we know what the answer would be in both cases... just as I could predict with 100% accuracy the results of this poll. So, I'm kidding. Relax. I would love to have the law repealed so I could load up on some really cool toys for next to nothing. I would LOVE to have the ability to buy new M16's, M249's, M240's, FN90's, G36's, etc. Who wouldn't? Laugh.
View Quote
It's not really all that funny. I've met some people with those same attitudes. Those people really don't get it. Michael
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:50:04 AM EST
Originally Posted By SouthernShark: But if you are young and you work, then you are just pathetic.
View Quote
Since you were probably typing before you had a chance to read my comments above (about kidding), I'll give you a pass on this post. Just in case you missed it the first time though: dude, I was kidding. I was button pushing, fishing for rants, goofing around... Wee! I'm goofy! [:D]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:51:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:52:50 AM EST
Originally Posted By Ponyboy: It's not really all that funny. I've met some people with those same attitudes. Those people really don't get it.
View Quote
You know people who hold similar beliefs to those I posted above? Really? C'mon, you're pulling my leg now, right? I could understand people being opposed to private ownership of machineguns (well, not really but it's somewhat more rational) but what I was saying is total lunacy. If you do know someone like that, I say punk them out, take their wallet and never talk to them again.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 10:55:55 AM EST
If someone were to make the argument that WGunn was joking about (that the right to bear arms should extend to nukes), they are taking the right to bear arms, and pressing it to it most absurd limits in order to discredit it. This is a common logical fallacy that anti-gunners just love. Every time they use that argument you must explain to them the difference between "arms," and "destructive devices." The "gubment" recognizes the difference, and so should you if you ever have to debate one of these pansies.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 11:02:10 AM EST
Originally Posted By dissipator556: Every time they use that argument you must explain to them the difference between "arms," and "destructive devices."
View Quote
While I agree with what you're saying in concept, I must disagree that a nuke can be called a "destructive device". [:)] We can still legally own destructive devices (grenades, C4, etc.) while to my knowledge no one is legally able to own "weapons of mass destruction". I think a nuke easily falls into this category. [:D]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 11:09:37 AM EST
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 11:21:36 AM EST
As the kids say - Duuuuh!
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 1:16:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By wgunn:
Originally Posted By Ponyboy: It's not really all that funny. I've met some people with those same attitudes. Those people really don't get it.
View Quote
You know people who hold similar beliefs to those I posted above? Really? C'mon, you're pulling my leg now, right? I could understand people being opposed to private ownership of machineguns (well, not really but it's somewhat more rational) but what I was saying is total lunacy. If you do know someone like that, I say punk them out, take their wallet and never talk to them again.
View Quote
I ran into two older guys, professional looking types, at a gun show. I noticed them both looking and talking about a Browning 1919 and about what a good investment it would probably be. Myself working on aquiring a 1919, I struck up a conversation with them. After talking to them for a couple of minutes I figured out what they were about. They were simply investing in collectable weapons, mostly machineguns, and simply thought of them as another investment in their portfolio. They didn't even shoot the damn things. Your earlier sentiments pretty much covered what they both were saying, except for the being the top dog at the gun range part. Guess thats the way you think when all you think about is money though. Michael
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 1:23:46 PM EST
No! I would be bankrupt if that happened. Ammo costs would kill me. Sometimes the goverment needs to protect people from themselves. [50]
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 1:32:18 PM EST
For me, it's a friggin moot point unless they also remove the CLEO signature requirement.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 1:35:04 PM EST
Originally Posted By DriftPunch: For me, it's a friggin moot point unless they also remove the CLEO signature requirement.
View Quote
Incorporate.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 1:35:26 PM EST
I'm with SS109. Those machine guns suck! (down the shells baby) Last time I went shooting with Title II holder buddies, I blasted away $700 of ammo in less than 2 hours. And that was mostly reloading time!!!! Me no have no $$.
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 11:24:53 PM EST
Link Posted: 11/13/2001 11:46:48 PM EST
If I can't own them, then no one else should!
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 12:52:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/14/2001 12:45:03 AM EST by DoubleFeed]
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 12:58:45 AM EST
killerkain you krack me up dude.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 4:54:23 AM EST
Yes. The almost total lack of crime by legal full auto owners shows that the current system works. They should repeal the 1986 ban, as all it did was drive up prices.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 4:58:05 AM EST
Originally Posted By hatebreed: killerkain you krack me up dude.
View Quote
[:D]
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 4:58:27 AM EST
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 5:38:14 AM EST
OF COURSE!
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 6:01:37 AM EST
mabey we instead should change the law so equel rights an dprotections cover everyone. so if the military can have if, the people can have it. If law enforcment can have it the people can have it. end the laws that make people unequal.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 6:42:02 AM EST
I haven't seen killerkain posting on this board. Seems he died with the old HK91.com board. May God rest his digital soul... he was a funny bastard.
Link Posted: 11/14/2001 11:17:07 AM EST
There can be only [b]ONE[/b]. Now kneel and offer homage to the almighty Killerkain. Yawn, it's been a long restful knap but this thread rekindled my interest in posting again. So, who called me fourth and for what reason?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top