Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/24/2006 7:19:11 PM EDT
Almost everyone on this board supports gun ownership. And most support reducing restrictions on ownership of machineguns.

If you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all the people around you had guns, wouldn't you want one? Seeing as how you post on arfcom and own guns, I guess 100% should answer yes.

Now, if you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all your neighbors had nukes, wouldn't you want nukes too? Isreal, Russia, Pakistan and China all have nukes, and the US isn't a neighbor but is certainly a presence in the Middle East. All have nuclear weapons and could use them against Iran. So shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves, just as we should be able to have guns if we live in a shitty neighborhood?

The fact is, both civilian machine gun ownership, and the possession of nukes by other countries, both weaken the United States government. That's why they are dead set against the proliferation of both. North Korea went nuclear and guess what, we don't push them around anymore. The world took note and that has probably driven Iran's nuclear ambition more than anything else.

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:20:29 PM EDT
By your analogy, letting Iran have nukes would be like letting a street-gang have MGs and not be bound by NFA rules.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:21:36 PM EDT
Nukes in the hands of folks that actually desire using them is a very bad idea. Not to mention nukes are a tad more dangerous than small arms.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:22:10 PM EDT
Because if I had a MG I wouldn't run out and immediately hose the neighborhood with it.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:22:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:23:01 PM EDT
Because we are, mostly, rational and the president of Iran is crackers?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:23:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By crazyquik:
Almost everyone on this board supports gun ownership. And most support reducing restrictions on ownership of machineguns.

If you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all the people around you had guns, wouldn't you want one? Seeing as how you post on arfcom and own guns, I guess 100% should answer yes.

Now, if you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all your neighbors had nukes, wouldn't you want nukes too? Isreal, Russia, Pakistan and China all have nukes, and the US isn't a neighbor but is certainly a presence in the Middle East. All have nuclear weapons and could use them against Iran. So shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves, just as we should be able to have guns if we live in a shitty neighborhood?

The fact is, both civilian machine gun ownership, and the possession of nukes by other countries, both weaken the United States government. That's why they are dead set against the proliferation of both. North Korea went nuclear and guess what, we don't push them around anymore. The world took note and that has probably driven Iran's nuclear ambition more than anything else.


This post makes baby Jesus cry.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:23:21 PM EDT
Because I say so.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:24:19 PM EDT
Because most of us aren't vowing to commit genocide on a weekly basis.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:25:08 PM EDT
Like I just posted in another thread asking this same question...
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:25:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:26:10 PM EDT by ImplementOfWar]
Because Iran has said and done some stupid things.

Because Iran is based on a religion. And that religion is based on nonbeleivers being evil.

Since the US is largely made up of nonbeleivers, we are evil.

Why should we allow Iran (who thinks we are evil) to posses atomic weapons? They worship everyday to Allah, who supposedly will banish you to hell for not being Islamic.

Not to mention their country is a cesspit. They are dirty. Uneducated. Primitive. And lawless.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:26:04 PM EDT

Do you REALLY want your neighbor, who promise to exterminate your entire family, and who threatens to kill you every day - to have machineguns?


Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:26:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:27:07 PM EDT by Hank_Rearden1]

Originally Posted By crazyquik:
Almost everyone on this board supports gun ownership. And most support reducing restrictions on ownership of machineguns.

If you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all the people around you had guns, wouldn't you want one? Seeing as how you post on arfcom and own guns, I guess 100% should answer yes.

Now, if you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all your neighbors had nukes, wouldn't you want nukes too? Isreal, Russia, Pakistan and China all have nukes, and the US isn't a neighbor but is certainly a presence in the Middle East. All have nuclear weapons and could use them against Iran. So shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves, just as we should be able to have guns if we live in a shitty neighborhood?

The fact is, both civilian machine gun ownership, and the possession of nukes by other countries, both weaken the United States government. That's why they are dead set against the proliferation of both. North Korea went nuclear and guess what, we don't push them around anymore. The world took note and that has probably driven Iran's nuclear ambition more than anything else.




Let's see....

we all live in a neighborhood and we all seem to get along and live by our mutal rules (all of us have MGs or nukes). Except one neighbor kepps saying that he is going to kill another neighbor... all of the other neighbors get together and tell him that until he reforms, he will not be allowed to have MGs, nukes.

Law biding Americans as a free and responsible people should be trusted to have MGs or any other type of "arms" for that matter... non-lawbiding americans, those outside the perview of being defined as "the People" i.e. fellons who lose their right to vote cannot keep or bear arms.

Hope that helps you understand.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:26:59 PM EDT
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:28:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:28:49 PM EDT by Da_Bunny]

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:



+1

crazythick
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:29:38 PM EDT
The threat to our security would dictate that we destroy Iran totally and ensure that it could never againt present a problem to us. By keeping them disarmed to a point, we defer the need to cross that line.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:32:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:33:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:33:55 PM EDT
Because this is our earth.

We let them live here.

They need to understand that they must play nice, by our rules, or we nuke them off of it.

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:35:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:35:31 PM EDT
Damn! What is with the idiotic "Iran should have nukes" threads?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:36:46 PM EDT
Wow. So now an American citizen with an MG is akin to Iran with nukes?

What is the value of Pi in your world?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:37:20 PM EDT
The answer lies in you letting one of them date your daughter or coming over to your house for dinner wearing one of their fashionable bomb jackets.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:39:23 PM EDT
Yes its true . You can buy an MG off an icecream truck and destroy an entire country by spraying bullets into the sky.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:39:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:41:18 PM EDT by NYPatriot]
Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that Crazyquik does not have a problem with Iran building nukes because he hopes/knows that Iran will use them on Israel???

Don't look now Crazyquik, but your invisible swastika is showing.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:42:41 PM EDT
WTF is wrong with you?

a. Nazi

b. idiot

c. all of the above
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:44:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



And if you plan to commit a crime with a machine gun, are you really going to bother getting yourself fingerprinted, waiting 6 months to be approved, get a leo's signature, and paying several times the price for a legal one?

Or are you just going to get a parts kit, a mini-mill, and build your own?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:46:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By FMJshooter:
Yes its true . You can buy an MG off an icecream truck and destroy an entire country by spraying bullets into the sky.



no, the analogy is as following:

individual with machine gun intent on crime is to individual crime as country with nuclear weapons is to international crime.

if an individual should be able to get a machine gun FTF or through manufacture, then a country should be allowed to get nukes FTF or through development.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:47:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



And if you plan to commit a crime with a machine gun, are you really going to bother getting yourself fingerprinted, waiting 6 months to be approved, get a leo's signature, and paying several times the price for a legal one?

Or are you just going to get a parts kit, a mini-mill, and build your own?



read before you post.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:48:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 7:50:36 PM EDT by Hank_Rearden1]

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



The response is that it most common that person of legal age to purchase a MG or any firearm for that matter who has a propensity to commit a crime will in all likelyhood already have committed some kind of crime as a juvinile rendering them unable to pass a background check. Same goes for someone in age group of 35 or higher looking to pass a background check to obtain a firearm with which they will commit a crime... very unlike they will have a clean record. Also, even a moderately rational person would have to be a complete moron to legally purchase a firearm for the purpose of committing crime... surely they would no the ease at which the weapon will be traced back to them. The individual would have to have no desire to flee or escape. Again... a person with this mentallity likely will have something in thier past that would preclude from passing a background check. By background check I am not referring to class III.

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:49:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By FMJshooter:
Yes its true . You can buy an MG off an icecream truck and destroy an entire country by spraying bullets into the sky.



no, the analogy is as following:

individual with machine gun intent on crime is to individual crime as country with nuclear weapons is to international crime.

if an individual should be able to get a machine gun FTF or through manufacture, then a country should be allowed to get nukes FTF or through development.



There is no analogy. You are essentially saying that anyone who puts "to kill me alot of people" on the "reason for purchase" line should get rubberstamped approval.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:51:06 PM EDT
Letting Iran have nukes is like letting a retarded kid machine gun.

Those muslims are in the stone age. They dont have the maturity to own such a weapon.

Its like some old Star Trek or Sci Fi movie - where Aliens dont trust man with their knowledge, as they will misuse it.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:51:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By crazyquik:
Almost everyone on this board supports gun ownership. And most support reducing restrictions on ownership of machineguns.

If you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all the people around you had guns, wouldn't you want one? Seeing as how you post on arfcom and own guns, I guess 100% should answer yes.

Now, if you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all your neighbors had nukes, wouldn't you want nukes too? Isreal, Russia, Pakistan and China all have nukes, and the US isn't a neighbor but is certainly a presence in the Middle East. All have nuclear weapons and could use them against Iran. So shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves, just as we should be able to have guns if we live in a shitty neighborhood?

The fact is, both civilian machine gun ownership, and the possession of nukes by other countries, both weaken the United States government. That's why they are dead set against the proliferation of both. North Korea went nuclear and guess what, we don't push them around anymore. The world took note and that has probably driven Iran's nuclear ambition more than anything else.




Get the fuck out and move to Iran, Asshole!
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:53:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hank_Rearden1:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



The response is that it most common that person of legal age to purchase a MG or any firearm for that matter who has a propensity to commit a crime will in all likelyhood already have committed some kind of crime as a juvinile rendering them unable to pass a background check. Same goes for someone in age group of 35 or higher looking to pass a background check to obtain a firearm with which they will commit a crime... very unlike they will have a clean record. Also, even a moderately rational person would have to be a complete moron to legally purchase a firearm for the purpose of committing crime... surely they would no the ease at which the weapon will be traced back to them. The individual would have to have no desire to flee or escape. Again... a person with this mentallity likely will have something in thier past that would preclude from passing a background check.




you are making pretty big assumptions, there are plenty of people who commit murder as their first crime of any kind(crimes of passion, e.g. people gunning down their offices). As Iran as a nation hasn't been declared "insane" yet, they should be allowed to get whatever they want, and they definitely would pass a nation level version of the form 4473 as they haven't:

1) attacked Israel or disobeyed rules of war
2) shown to be led by mentally insane rulers(this will change soon, the current leader is a quack).
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:54:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By FMJshooter:
Yes its true . You can buy an MG off an icecream truck and destroy an entire country by spraying bullets into the sky.



no, the analogy is as following:

individual with machine gun intent on crime is to individual crime as country with nuclear weapons is to international crime.

if an individual should be able to get a machine gun FTF or through manufacture, then a country should be allowed to get nukes FTF or through development.



There is no analogy. You are essentially saying that anyone who puts "to kill me alot of people" on the "reason for purchase" line should get rubberstamped approval.



there is no "reason for purchase" line on a form 4473, quit thinking "Title II", I said "Title I" which in most states makes it damn easy to get any gun that falls under Title I.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:54:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



And if you plan to commit a crime with a machine gun, are you really going to bother getting yourself fingerprinted, waiting 6 months to be approved, get a leo's signature, and paying several times the price for a legal one?

Or are you just going to get a parts kit, a mini-mill, and build your own?



read before you post.



Whatever, you know what I mean. Iran OBVIOUSLY intends to use it because they as much as SAID SO.

How many neighborhood gunstores are going to sell you as much as a BB gun if you come in every other day talking about how you can't wait to get a gun so you can go shoot up daycare centers?

There is no LAW preventing Iran from building nuclear weapons. The US is just a concerned neighbor that really doesn't want to get blown the fuck up by the crazy guy next door.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:55:22 PM EDT
Here is the situation:

You are armed to the teeth and are facing a possible threat. Your last line of defense is attacking, so you will do everything in your power to prevent that. Now, lets have a retarded prison inmate walk up to you and say "Give me your guns, please. I just want to kill you and everything you know." Now, what do you do? Do you:
A. Shoot the fucker for even asking
B. Just refuse him the weapons since he OBVIOUSLY cannot be trusted
C. Give him the gun, but not before loading it and manually pointing it at yourself and saying "Here you go, have a nice day"
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:57:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



And if you plan to commit a crime with a machine gun, are you really going to bother getting yourself fingerprinted, waiting 6 months to be approved, get a leo's signature, and paying several times the price for a legal one?

Or are you just going to get a parts kit, a mini-mill, and build your own?



read before you post.



Whatever, you know what I mean. Iran OBVIOUSLY intends to use it because they as much as SAID SO.

How many neighborhood gunstores are going to sell you as much as a BB gun if you come in every other day talking about how you can't wait to get a gun so you can go shoot up daycare centers?

There is no LAW preventing Iran from building nuclear weapons. The US is just a concerned neighbor that really doesn't want to get blown the fuck up by the crazy guy next door.



they haven't even said they want nuclear weapons, they have maintained that they just want nuclear power, and they haven't said they would nuke Israel, or even made threatening gestures, beyond saying that the holocaust was a myth.

You haven't provided any proof that they even intend to use the weapons, for all we know they just want them to put themselves in a place of power in the region, not to be bullied anymore by the West. I guess national sovereignty is good unless the nation happens to be one that you don't like.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 7:59:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bad_Aim:
Here is the situation:

You are armed to the teeth and are facing a possible threat. Your last line of defense is attacking, so you will do everything in your power to prevent that. Now, lets have a retarded prison inmate walk up to you and say "Give me your guns, please. I just want to kill you and everything you know." Now, what do you do? Do you:
A. Shoot the fucker for even asking
B. Just refuse him the weapons since he OBVIOUSLY cannot be trusted
C. Give him the gun, but not before loading it and manually pointing it at yourself and saying "Here you go, have a nice day"



No, it is akin to the inmate being a white supremacist and saying, "I sure hate them n******", without making any claims of wanting to kill black people.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:02:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By 1Andy2:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



And if you plan to commit a crime with a machine gun, are you really going to bother getting yourself fingerprinted, waiting 6 months to be approved, get a leo's signature, and paying several times the price for a legal one?

Or are you just going to get a parts kit, a mini-mill, and build your own?



read before you post.



Whatever, you know what I mean. Iran OBVIOUSLY intends to use it because they as much as SAID SO.

How many neighborhood gunstores are going to sell you as much as a BB gun if you come in every other day talking about how you can't wait to get a gun so you can go shoot up daycare centers?

There is no LAW preventing Iran from building nuclear weapons. The US is just a concerned neighbor that really doesn't want to get blown the fuck up by the crazy guy next door.



they haven't even said they want nuclear weapons, they have maintained that they just want nuclear power, and they haven't said they would nuke Israel, or even made threatening gestures, beyond saying that the holocaust was a myth.

You haven't provided any proof that they even intend to use the weapons, for all we know they just want them to put themselves in a place of power in the region, not to be bullied anymore by the West. I guess national sovereignty is good unless the nation happens to be one that you don't like.



Well it seems like we've got your number now at least.

I guess repeatedly saying they will push Israel into the sea is just a euphemism for saying they want to take Israel to the beach for a picnic.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:03:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 8:05:54 PM EDT by Hydguy]

Originally Posted By crazyquik:
Almost everyone on this board supports gun ownership. And most support reducing restrictions on ownership of machineguns.

If you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all the people around you had guns, wouldn't you want one? Seeing as how you post on arfcom and own guns, I guess 100% should answer yes.Except for you, so it can't be 100%.

Now, if you lived in a bad neighborhood, and all your neighbors had nukes, wouldn't you want nukes too? Isreal, Russia, Pakistan and China all have nukes, and the US isn't a neighbor but is certainly a presence in the Middle East. All have nuclear weapons and could use them against Iran. So shouldn't Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselvesIran has already promised to attack Israel if they get 'the bomb', so no, Iran won't be allowed to play with the the rest of the world, just as we should be able to have guns if we live in a shitty neighborhood?

The fact is, both civilian machine gun ownership, and the possession of nukes by other countries, both weaken the United States government.And your possession of a keyboard is a threat to my intelligence That's why they are dead set against the proliferation of both.An MG is just a touch different than a nuke in the world that I live in.. North Korea went nuclear and guess what, we don't push them around anymoreWe didn't push them around before. If you would have paid attention in history, you would recall that North Korea, with the help of China and Russia, tried to push South Korea around. We have not tried to topple NK. The world took note and that has probably driven Iran's nuclear ambition more than anything else. NK is led by a loon, who might have a bomb, so of course the world is gonna take note, just like if a gang banger moved in next to me, I'd take note




DU seems to have lost another one of it's village idiots...
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:06:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:
they haven't even said they want nuclear weapons, they have maintained that they just want nuclear power, and they haven't said they would nuke Israel, or even made threatening gestures, beyond saying that the holocaust was a myth.



Are you honestly that gullible and or stupid. Iranian diplomats themselves car barely keep from giggling when they deliver that line, and EVERYONE knows that they want the weapons. It is a fact, not an assumption. Plus, they have refused ANY deal that would GIVE them the technology and ability to generate nuclear power and develop nuclear technology, with the only restriction that they could NOT keep the enriched fuel that can only be used for weapons.

And - they have repeatedly called for the destruction of the State of Israel. Did you miss that, somehow?



You haven't provided any proof that they even intend to use the weapons, for all we know they just want them to put themselves in a place of power in the region, not to be bullied anymore by the West. I guess national sovereignty is good unless the nation happens to be one that you don't like.



That's a bogus argument. Was there any PROOF that the U.S. really, honestly, seriously 100% INTENDED to use the atom bomb, right up to the point when they actually used it??

Come on, that's a nonsensical argument right there.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:06:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

they haven't even said they want nuclear weapons, they have maintained that they just want nuclear power, and they haven't said they would nuke Israel, or even made threatening gestures, beyond saying that the holocaust was a myth.

You haven't provided any proof that they even intend to use the weapons, for all we know they just want them to put themselves in a place of power in the region, not to be bullied anymore by the West. I guess national sovereignty is good unless the nation happens to be one that you don't like.



You do not know what the hell you are talking about. Are you really that dense... of course they say they are not going tp produce weapons just like Pakistan did and North Korea does… are you dumb enough to believe that lie.

Iran has said Israel should be burned off the face of the earth only an idiot cannot understand what that means.

Their intent is clear to all but idiot children.

Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:07:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Hank_Rearden1:

Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:

Originally Posted By Dino:
because we don't give machine guns to anyone. It requires passing a background check.

Iran has failed the background check and don't get nukes. Sorry. Talk to the ATF



what he is saying is how most here support the deregulation of machine guns to normal Title I status, i.e. go through an FFL or FTF transfer. What if you haven't commited a crime but plan to, you could technically still get machine guns; as with Iran, they haven't attacked Israel...yet, but if we gave them nukes, they certainly have a good chance of doing so.



The response is that it most common that person of legal age to purchase a MG or any firearm for that matter who has a propensity to commit a crime will in all likelyhood already have committed some kind of crime as a juvinile rendering them unable to pass a background check. Same goes for someone in age group of 35 or higher looking to pass a background check to obtain a firearm with which they will commit a crime... very unlike they will have a clean record. Also, even a moderately rational person would have to be a complete moron to legally purchase a firearm for the purpose of committing crime... surely they would no the ease at which the weapon will be traced back to them. The individual would have to have no desire to flee or escape. Again... a person with this mentallity likely will have something in thier past that would preclude from passing a background check.




you are making pretty big assumptions, there are plenty of people who commit murder as their first crime of any kind(crimes of passion, e.g. people gunning down their offices). As Iran as a nation hasn't been declared "insane" yet, they should be allowed to get whatever they want, and they definitely would pass a nation level version of the form 4473 as they haven't:

1) attacked Israel or disobeyed rules of war
2) shown to be led by mentally insane rulers(this will change soon, the current leader is a quack).



With all respect... my assumptions are based on common sense and logical arguement and as such I have rationally illustrated them... however unless you can back up your assertion "plenty of people who commit murder as their first crime of any kind(crimes of passion, e.g. people gunning down their offices)" with some actual facts, i would have to say that your arguement fails to persuade. To my knowledge the incidents to which you refer have never been reported (in any significant number, i.e. exceeding two incidents in any given year) to have been commited with a recently legally purchased firearm.

Others on this board may be able to support your assertion.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:09:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 8:31:58 PM EDT by NYPatriot]
Far too many closet Nazis & Muslim apologists around here these days.

Kinda sad & disturbing if you ask me...
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:13:04 PM EDT
State sponsored terrorism comes to mind.

BTW....I live in a bad neighborhood, and the bad guys already have MG's.....Where's mine??
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:14:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 8:20:48 PM EDT by thedoctors308]

Originally Posted By ImplementOfWar:
Because Iran has said and done some stupid things.

Because Iran is based on a religion. And that religion is based on nonbeleivers being evil.

Since the US is largely made up of nonbeleivers, we are evil.

Why should we allow Iran (who thinks we are evil) to posses atomic weapons? They worship everyday to Allah, who supposedly will banish you to hell for not being Islamic.

Not to mention their country is a cesspit. They are dirty. Uneducated. Primitive. And lawless.



How is getting that Domestic Violence conviction purged from you record going?
Think before you speak.
Most Iranians are far more educated than you.

In re: to the thread topic.
While I understand where the poster is going with this...
An MG is not a nuke.
Nukes are nukes.
I don't trust Iran with nukes.
If you wanna have nukes, be like Israel or South Africa.
Build them, and don't tell anyone.
No one wants saber rattlers to have nukes.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:17:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/24/2006 8:19:01 PM EDT by Hydguy]


Originally Posted By PreMed_Gunner:


1) attacked Israel or disobeyed rules of warTHey used children as both shields and as mine clearing tools during the Iran/Iraq war
2) shown to be led by mentally insane rulersHmm..You forget about that little hostage crisis back in 1979? Or were you even born then? Or Ayatollah Khomeini?(this will change soon, the current leader is a quack).



Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:28:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Wow. So now an American citizen with an MG is akin to Iran with nukes?

What is the value of Pi in your world?



Atleast dinner and a movie.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:30:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:



+infinity
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 8:37:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bastiat:

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:



+infinity



and 1
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top