close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

I think the NFA is Unconstitutional

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Kingarthurhk, Dec 8, 2012.

  1. eccho

    eccho

    1,190
    6
    Mar 28, 2012
    Really dude? I get what your saying but c'mon now. You don't need to be so abrasive.

    Crying and tongueout emoticons? That was kind of unnecessary.

    "All some of you want to do is moan and groan about how horrible, evil and corrupt things are but don't seem to want to do anything at all to try and fix the system you say is so broken." What on earth is he supposed to do?

    I would argue that complaining about something is better than just taking it.

    I tell you what, how about I draft a proposal for the revision of the entire political establishment of the United States and send that off to the legislative branch of government?
     
  2. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    Yeah really dude.

    Did you read what he posted?

    "What planet are you living on? The costs are prohibitive for the common citizen. Just to retain a lawyer to BEGIN actions would break my account for like... the rest of my life. The legal system you seem to be so proud of is part of the problem as well. There is no justice in this nation except for those that can pay."

    Oh poor me I am a victim of the rich people and their laws.....typical liberal crap. I don't think he is a liberal but darn if that does not sound like one crying about class inequity in America. It's crap from a liberal or whatever political party.....it's crap from him IMO. It might be abrasive but his whining was abrasive to me. Not to mention I clearly was not saying he should pocket the cost but align a lawsuit with companies making these weapon systems as I am sure they would love a commercial market if they were legalized.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2012

  3. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    Sadly after today this debate seems pointless. In no way do I think today would have been prevented with any version of the AWB but regardless of that fact I think we will see it re-enacted. As feel good legislation.

    Any such notion as the repeal (which most on here support) or even altering (which I support) of the NFA is a dead issue.

    The votes in D.C. are there to bring the AWB back is at least some form.
     
  4. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    I agree with #2 & #3 (to a different degree than you clearly) but #1 is a stretch to say the least. If they are arming a P51 then they can arm a Cessna as well. To bring classic military planes into the debate is clearly because they were weapons system at one time, as I said there are not strafing attacks because they are no longer armed. The poster might as well used any plane as a example.
     
  5. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    I havent kept up with the thread. Has anyone got the laws overturned yet?
     
  6. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk Isaiah 53:4-9

    10,243
    1,323
    Sep 5, 2010
    Texas
    Planes don't need armament. They are flying bombs. 9/11 proved that.
     
  7. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    Wow...just wow.....:faint:


    His point was that were not seeing any strafing runs even though private citizens had all types of WWII fighter aircraft is private possession. If military grade weapons in the hands of average citizens were dangerous why were we not see these aircraft used as such.

    My reply was that they were no longer armed any more than a Cessna was so of course they were not military grade weapons as he implied.

    And from that you come up with basically

    "yeah but they can still crash into things and cause massive damage."

    And that proves what? That almost anything can be used to cause destruction? And that means we should just allow whoever to own whatever because anything can be used as a weapon?

    Reed Richards could not make that reach of logic you just did. Congrats.
     
  8. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk Isaiah 53:4-9

    10,243
    1,323
    Sep 5, 2010
    Texas
    It proves that you can kill with about anything. You don't need ordinance on a plane to kill. You just need a plane. So, I am guessing owning planes will soon be banned? That only corporations and the military will only be allowed to own aircraft, because it is too dangerous for citizens to have. Which, I think fits well within your modus operedi, doesn't it?
     
  9. Ruggles

    Ruggles

    10,280
    23
    Jun 13, 2005
    Tejas
    So why do you own self defense type guns? Why do you want access to any weapons we are talking about that is current restricted?

    I mean if you can kill with just about anything why do you need any of it?

    .......

    Because it makes the killing a whole hellua a lot more efficient and easier is why.

    Again back to the ability of adults to rationalize.

    P51 unarmed in crazy guys hands = smaller risk to society than fully armed (as in 6 x .50 BMG) P51 in same guys hands to use the plane analogy.

    Tell you what reply this time and you can have the last word for good cause we are not debating on the same level IMO and I am not going to reply back. :wavey:
     
  10. Kingarthurhk

    Kingarthurhk Isaiah 53:4-9

    10,243
    1,323
    Sep 5, 2010
    Texas
    Good golly, you sound like you are channeling Diane Fienstein and the folks in the UK who have banned anything pointy.

    Actually, within a certain distance a person wielding a knife is more likely to kill somoene with a firearm. Either way, you are going to get cut, maimed or killed, even if you have a handgun out and ready, unless you can offline in time. So, you're "point", to use a pun, is silly.

    So, I guess you want to ban the .50 as not being worhty of consideration in your world as well?

    I've heard that before.:supergrin: There is no way to make society safe. The bad guys will always have anything that want at their disposal, NFA or otherwise? Why? Because, they are bad guys, it is their nature to do whatever they want, laws be damned.

    The only people getting screwed over are the law abiding citizens. None of these laws deter the criminal element, not even a little bit. If laws stopped criminals, then there would not be any need for law enforcement, the judicial system, or prisons.

    Laws aren't magical barriers that keep bad things from happening. Laws infringing on the 2A don't make society safe. They just keep honest people from fully excercising their liberties. The criminal element has been enjoying the full largesse of the 2A despite whatever the law says. A shocker, they will continue to do that.

    To illustrate the point:

    [​IMG]