It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by PrepareForTheWorst
reply to post by TheHunted
As an OIF Vet you would have seen what a simple machete can do to a human body. Should we not then ban those as well? After all, if we can just save one life...
Originally posted by TheHunted
Try defending yourself at 300 meters away from M-16 fire. Think
Originally posted by TheHunted
I can see how closed minded you are. Hand to hand, people have the possibility of disarming a person who has a over sized knife. Try defending yourself at 300 meters away from M-16 fire. Think
Originally posted by TheHunted
No this banning is not unconstitutional, please just use a bit of common sense. Unconstitutional would be the banning of all firearms. Please think before you post. Reacting on emotional does not work.
We have the Active Armed Forces combined with the National Guard and Reserves for a reason. There is reason why our military posts are strategically placed through out the U.S. Its to maximize our response time in case of such a threat.
Thanks for your time...
Originally posted by bknapple32
Hunted, some people are just far too narrow minded to see beyond their own enjoyment of shooting a gun. Ramifications exist, and some people just dont want t o acknowledge they exist. Its ok, you being a vet should know than most. Including me. And Im sure lots of vets would disagree with you. but I just love how level headed you are, and how you can see the differences here. Keep it up.
Originally posted by infolurker
Yes, First guns, then kitchen knives, screwdrivers and finally.... wait for it ... .THE DEADLY SPORK from KFC!
Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by ludaChris
If you enjoy just shooting it. I have nothing wrong with a system of where your assault rifle is held by a NRA certified shooting range. And you can use it there.
Originally posted by XTexan
Yet another discussion about the banning of "assault weapons". First off lets rename this bill to represent what it actually does. Lets call it the "Scary Looking Weapons Ban". It doesnt ban semi-auto guns (as far as I know). It only bans guns that some people have decided look scary.
The founding fathers would have said that MODERN firearms are needed by the civilians since these are MODERN times. So who's assuming the founding fathers would say "In MODERN time the civilians should only use out-dated firearms"? Thats an asinine assumption.
Quit trying to ban assualt weapons because they look scary. I mean seriously why even try? If you ban weapons based on cosmetic features, then our good friends in the gun companies will find loopholes and design them differently, heck maybe they'll find a way to make the features better for the gun user.
On another note, someone mentioned editing the Bill of Rights... thats treason.