Crime, and the absence of military grade machine guns

Scooter trash

Been Around the Block
Full on 50 caliber machine guns, and others, are legal. Between California, Texas, and Florida, there are over 60,000 legal registered military grade, machine guns...and zero used in a crime. They are registered, and you must pass a background test that is stiffer than a normal Conceal carry. Bump stocks did not qualify as a machine gun.
 

Attachments

  • mg1.png
    mg1.png
    178 KB · Views: 706
what are you saying here?

are you implying that machine guns are not a right? if so, how on earth do you come to that conclusion based on our bill of rights?
 
You also don’t have to be trained or certified, you just have to have a tax stamp from the gov. They cost around $10,000 for a grease gun which is basically entry level so they are generally only owned by collectors.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So, was this supposed to debunk the whole "military grade weapons in citizens hands are dangerous" bit, or na? Since citizens have actual military grade weapons, and nobody is committing crimes with them.
 
J-Rod10 said:
So, was this supposed to debunk the whole "military grade weapons in citizens hands are dangerous" bit, or na? Since citizens have actual military grade weapons, and nobody is committing crimes with them.

Former Marine here. 3/1 K '01-05 and contractor after in Iraq 06 & 07

what is all this talk about "military grade" weapons?

military grade is what the government was willing to spend on millions of rifles - AKA complete SHIT from the lowest bidder that could meet supply demands. I was 0331 (machine gunner) and I carried 3 spare barrels on any venture OTW.

the rifles I own now are of far better quality, and I while they may not be black and scary looking, they will fuck you up more than the ones I used while I was making terrorist wannabes do the room temperature challenge
 
More of a crack at the ban the AR-15 because nobody should have military grade weapons crowd.
 
The point is that these weapons are deadly but not a threat for one reason, they are registered. You can't give out deadly force as a right or it will get abused in the wrong hands. Not everyone with a right, is sane. Not everyone with a right, will have common sense.
Have the government hand out free, unlimited supplies of Heroin, and you will have overdoses the same day.
We need cars, hammers, baseball bats, knives, and axes. Believe it or not, we could live without guns...unless you live in an American city.
 
I'd be cool with closing the miniscule "loophole" at gun shows. Where private citizens can sell freely.

Any weapon purchased legally from a dealer, there is record of the purchase.

On your attempted point of tying regulation to lack of crimes committed, I think the wrong question is being asked. A better question, is do people with the means to legally purchase these weapons, commit less violent crime?

I don't know how many people in a hurry to kill folks have $20K to spend on a firearm to do it with, nor the patience to wait months, up to a year to get final approval.

Meanwhile, they're used illegally, infrequently, but used.
 
Part of owning a Title II weapon, is giving the ATF access to your home at any time they so choose to show up.

Do you suggest, that should be required to own a weapon? A constitutionally guaranteed right, mind you.
 
Scooter trash said:
Between California, Texas, and Florida, there are over 60,000 legal registered military grade, machine guns...

It looks like some folks are prepared for the zombie apocalypse!

Crazy
 
I realize that the logic of the argument I'm about to make is a touch flawed but nonetheless, here it goes.

Many second amendment rights people seem to also believe that the constitution is not a living thing that should be updated, but should be read and enacted the same way as it was when written. Logically, those same people should also agree that the weapons they have a right to own are those available at the writing of the constitution (or at least the amendments). Likewise, if the constitution should be interpreted to include or allow modern developments in technology, then by the same logic, the constitution needs to be updated to reflect those developments.

We can't reasonably argue that the rules should not change from when they were formulated and also argue that we should stretch them to allow modern weaponry. It's just not logical. Rules have to evolve as society and technology evolve and teh rule changes have to be appropriate to the times.
 
There were no technological limitations placed on our rights. The authors of our constitution and bill of rights knew first hand the power of weaponry at the time and their devastating effects on the human form. We had not yet invented or even conceived the internet but they also knew the power free thought and written speech was and chose to protect it from government intrusion as well. There was no asterisk or footnote saying that our rights to defend ourselves from a tyrannical government would end at the invention if the machine gun, or the strict limit of 16 inches or longer barrels, no larger than 30mm in diameter.

You say rules have to evolve. You fail to understand what the bill of rights even is. It does not grant us our rights... it recognizes them as being inherent and inalienable. They limit ONLY the government from suppressing our thoughts and freedom. If the rules must evolve, then so should our government. Because when the average citizen is outgunned by a police force that's designed to protect them, something is very wrong.
 
I think most 2A folks believe that the 2A is meant to protect them from a tyrannical government. Or, allow them to protect themselves anyhow.

It doesn't, you know, with nuclear weapons and missiles, and what not, but that was the intent behind it.

End of the day, those that want a gun to commit a crime with, are going to get their hands on one rather easily.
 
J-Rod10 said:
End of the day, those that want a gun to commit a crime with, are going to get their hands on one rather easily.

My main question here is this, how many homicides occur simply because the person had a weapon on hand?

How many altercations that would have been solved with fists end up being solve with a gun just because someone decided to carry?
 
J-Rod10 said:
I think most 2A folks believe that the 2A is meant to protect them from a tyrannical government. Or, allow them to protect themselves anyhow.

It doesn't, you know, with nuclear weapons and missiles, and what not, but that was the intent behind it.

End of the day, those that want a gun to commit a crime with, are going to get their hands on one rather easily.
As a veteran of modern war I can tell you that it does.

We are still fighting men in caves. Why?
Sure, if a government wanted to destroy its population then it could use a nuke... then what would they govern? Tyranny requires someone to oppress.
A tank cant knock on your door and see your papers. A 2000lb JDAM cannot enforce curfew.
 
farmer92 said:
My main question here is this, how many homicides occur simply because the person had a weapon on hand?

How many altercations that would have been solved with fists end up being solve with a gun just because someone decided to carry?
More than 33,000 innocent lives a a year are saved because instead of being a victim, people are able to defend themselves.
 
MiniatureNinja said:
As a veteran of modern war I can tell you that it does.

We are still fighting men in caves. Why?
Sure, if a government wanted to destroy its population then it could use a nuke... then what would they govern? Tyranny requires someone to oppress.
A tank cant knock on your door and see your papers. A 2000lb JDAM cannot enforce curfew.
You are fighting men in caves because your administration is retarded! Blowing goat herders up with million dollar missiles cant really be seen any other way.
Gun rights on the other hand i wish we had in sweden. Country is brimming with armed and violent goat herders from your current conflict zones and we cant defend ourselves, like wtf??
 
datadavid said:
You are fighting men in caves because your administration is retarded! Blowing goat herders up with million dollar missiles cant really be seen any other way.
Gun rights on the other hand i wish we had in sweden. Country is brimming with armed and violent goat herders from your current conflict zones and we cant defend ourselves, like wtf??

our current administration is the reason we've made so much headway in the fight against these fuckers.
our last 2 presidents were content showing off, making money, and killing soldiers.
you cannot just walk away from the mess, we have allies in the region that would greatly suffer. we announced pull out dates before, and it resulted in disaster. I know.. I fought for Fallujah twice
besides your invaders have passed by at least 4 countries to get to yours.... stop opening doors. Sweden used to respect it's citizens, now they are considered second class in the name of "tolerance"

back to the subject at hand - you're not alone in that sentiment... I've been in conflics in Kenya, Somalia, Ukraine, and several other places that would piss liberals off if I mentioned - disarmament always precedes genocide
 
MiniatureNinja said:
our current administration is the reason we've made so much headway in the fight against these fuckers.
our last 2 presidents were content showing off, making money, and killing soldiers.
you cannot just walk away from the mess, we have allies in the region that would greatly suffer. we announced pull out dates before, and it resulted in disaster. I know.. I fought for Fallujah twice
besides your invaders have passed by at least 4 countries to get to yours.... stop opening doors. Sweden used to respect it's citizens, now they are considered second class in the name of "tolerance"

back to the subject at hand - you're not alone in that sentiment... I've been in conflics in Kenya, Somalia, Ukraine, and several other places that would piss liberals off if I mentioned - disarmament always precedes genocide

I think we pretty much agree on everything here. We are closing the doors in september if the right wing parties get elected. Flood gates have been open for too long and our tolerance is definitely worn down by now. Mena refugees just dont mix with open western societies.
 
Back
Top Bottom