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.

 

After Shooting, MA Gov Seeks Limits On Machine-Gun Ownership

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Doc Gator
 


Hey now, don't go lumping all us Ohioans that own firearms as loonies.


But yeah, some guns are easier to acquire. In my youth, I could have purchased a full auto Uzi with folding butt stock for the then fairly high price of $300. Why didn't I make the purchase (and it was before the full ban mind you), I was not yet 18 at the time. By the time I did turn 18, it had sold. Not that I really wanted it, just that I could have had it.

I prefer revolvers and level/bolt action to semi-autos in the first place.

But this push for the bill is the same as all recent pushes for gun control bills, knee jerk reactions. The same as what disarmed Australia, a knee jerk reaction to a massacre.

The real question is which are the real jerks here: the ones that create the bills or the ones that support them?




posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miracle Man
I agree with him.

Nobody but a soldier on a battlefield needs an automatic weapon. There isn't a justification for having one.


First off, I agree with you 1000% (that no one NEEDS an automatic weapon...I mean seriously...they do not...semi-autos are just fine). However, as we know, no legislation will stop the people who really want these weapons from getting them, right?

[edit on 11-5-2010 by MarshMallow_Snake]



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Don't you think that the main reason to own an automatic weapon is that those who might try to take us over, or create a tyranny might have those weapons? Would it not be prudent to have parity?


Didn't one of the Justices say during that debate over DC's laws that he saw no reason why private citizens should not have the same weapons as the US military?

For those that can be responsible with them there is no reason to deny them.

The attempt to eliminate them seems to hinge on the "Might" syndrome.
He/she .... might.

We really don't want to travel down that path.

I'm thinking that if we want to apply the "might" syndrome, it needs to be applied in positive versus negative ways. As allowance versus forbearance.

I would suggest that behind the efforts to take things from citizens is an unseen notion or maybe a simple result, that there will be and are people who would desire and do desire to be able to treat you badly with you having no recourse left to yourself. They would like to operate with impunity. I'm sure that you have met people like that at some time or another. We cannot let the "tyranny of a few" dictate to us any more than we can allow the "tyranny of the many" to tromp over everyone's rights like that.

Who REALLY would want to take a citizen's natural right of self defense by the best means available away? We have a duty to preserve ourselves. WE are part of life too. I have no duty to leave my personal defense in the hands of others. "Others" have proven themselves time and time again to be either ineffective or simply incompetent in dealing with a wide variety of issues.

In THIS issue, the idea that a kid was slain on a basketball court, so we ought to outlaw machine guns, without us KNOWING that an automatic weapon... and you have to careful with that wording too... was used is like an argument that says:

A Chevy caused an accident yesterday, Let's outlaw Fords.

OMG, a frog jumped over a log, let's outlaw the dog!

The logic IS the same, that's the absurdity of it.

I am suspicious that ALL news articles that I have tried to find, do NOT list the weapon kind used in the murder. This suggests that the officials do not want to be countered by eyewitness (meaning EAR witness) accounts.

Its just that I see no need to USE incidents to pass unfair and unjust laws of a separate nature in creating some fanciful and metaphysical connection that does not exist. It is a Lie.

[edit on 11-5-2010 by akalepos]

[edit on 11-5-2010 by akalepos]

[edit on 11-5-2010 by akalepos]



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by mumma in pyjamas
 


That’s not what I meant, we can have a civil discussion, it will turn ugly if you pass laws limiting my freedom, Just like the Nazis do. And I am glad I live in a country where I can keep my guns, cause really you never know when you will need them.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Good points being presented


The biggest surprise for me was that it was still legal to own an automatic weapon in MA. They are somewhat restricted in Virginia where I live.

I also doubt that if this law were already in place, that it could have prevented the recent tragedy there.

However, could the Governor, by pointing to this one crime, get the votes he needs to pass this?

Will he get the votes, I am not familiar with the MA legislature, I just hope they don't act like the folks on Capitol Hill who seems to thrive on passing legislation based on emotion, which seems to be the key factor in this latest push for passage.


This is surprising to me as well. I used to live in Massachusetts and you basically have to do 50 somersaults backwards and uphill to be able to own a gun there! I just found out yesterday from a former cop up there that glocks are banned...so why are automatic weapons not?

Edited to add: And yes, Mass residents have been brainwashed to believe that guns are bad, so he will get this passed. When I lived there, I was anti-gun...now that I live in AZ, I have been awakened to the freedoms of the 2nd amendment
.

[edit on 11-5-2010 by MarshMallow_Snake]



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by Miracle Man
 


Screw that, If you want a machine gun, you should be able to get one. Look its a senseless death. There our gang bangers who are better armed and equiped then most COPS.... I think I will keep my AK-74 and dare you to take it away... I am willing to die for my rights and freedom, I am also willing to take yours if you try to impose your ideas of "freedom" on me.



Dont propose to threaten me. If you don't like my opinion on automatic weapons then thats tough # for you. Only a punk makes threats over the internet out of harms way. I would ask if you are a punk, but I think I have my answer.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tharsis

Originally posted by Miracle ManThere isn't a justification for having one.


Look around your home, brother.

Think of all the things you have that would be taken away if you didn't have a 'justification' for. Carpeting, that 2nd television, track lighting (of course I'm being presumptive, but I'm just trying to get my point across).

Think creature comforts and common conveniences.

Also, remember this "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". That is my justification for having things.

I like things. I do not need to justify my ownership to anyone.


where does THAT end, what if i want to own my very own nuke? My very own landmine to plant in my very own lawn, ooops sorry Mr mail man, you just got blown up with my landmine, but it's my right to have stuff i want.What if i want to a cats cadaver i just dug out of a garden? I don't need to justify that to ANYONE it's my right, right?

It's a little paranoid to suggest that your TV and carpet would be "taken away" without justification for having them.
HOW many times have the Government, politicians, citizens had a campaign to ban carpet?
They have NEVER.But i DO hear about banning guns again and again...



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarshMallow_Snake
...so why are automatic weapons not?


Because pushing it would make it a federal case. They dont want to push the "class 3" thing to the SCOTUS where they could potentially rule that the "class 3" nonsense is unconstitutional and get us back the where we before that NFA bull.

As much as the gun grabbers want to ban class 3 devices they certainly dont want to risk losing the little ground they have gained.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mumma in pyjamas
 


If you have the means to safely and securely store a nuke then go for it.

If you want to own a mine then go for it. If you want to plant in your yard then you should be ready to be responsible for any harm caused by it and be sure to place adequate signage warning others of it.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Cool. Thanks for the explanation! I appreciate the feedback.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by tauempire

Originally posted by Miracle Man
I agree with him.

Nobody but a soldier on a battlefield needs an automatic weapon. There isn't a justification for having one.


hey dude...you cant have a automatic weapon in the united states. only semi-auto.


Hey dude.... know what you are talking about before you make a statement like that.

Atleast read the article.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   
One the subject of legitimate military grade weapons in the hands of US citizens: In the event of an invasion or major upheaval, there will be a considerable amount in the hands of the people. Most will be handed out by the legitimate military to volunteer militia. The rest will be acquired by removal from the fallen.

Futuristic "ray guns" that are vastly superior to full autos would also relax the ownership laws surrounding them as well.

What is most interesting about firearms is that smooth bore black powder guns (the absolute hardest to forensically match round to gun that fired it) have the least amount of regulation. Provided you can find a retail seller of a 6 round cap and ball pistol, you can make the purchase that day.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Miracle Man
 


Look clown, I wasnt refering to you, I was refering to the no Machine Guns in general.... Do I want to own one, no I think A machine gun is a waste of bullets... One Shot one Kill thats what the army taught us. Not spray and pray.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by mumma in pyjamas
 


That’s not what I meant, we can have a civil discussion, it will turn ugly if you pass laws limiting my freedom, Just like the Nazis do. And I am glad I live in a country where I can keep my guns, cause really you never know when you will need them.



Have you ever heard of Godwins Rule of Nazi Analogies?
www.wisegeek.com...
It is so funny that just last night i was watching QI and they happened to mention Godwin's rule .........



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   



where does THAT end, what if i want to own my very own nuke? My very own landmine to plant in my very own lawn, ooops sorry Mr mail man, you just got blown up with my landmine, but it's my right to have stuff i want.What if i want to a cats cadaver i just dug out of a garden? I don't need to justify that to ANYONE it's my right, right?

It's a little paranoid to suggest that your TV and carpet would be "taken away" without justification for having them.
HOW many times have the Government, politicians, citizens had a campaign to ban carpet?
They have NEVER.But i DO hear about banning guns again and again...


Of course there is a reasonable limit. By law that limit really is on the extremely dangerous weaponry. Bazookas/RPGs and such. But you can own working cannons.

He's not being paranoid, he is making analogies.

It's not like someone is asking you to justify your existence.

If guns cause crime, then pencils cause mispelled words.

But if I mispelled 'mispelled', the computer's keyboard didn't do it.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by poedxsoldiervet
 


You sir are a joke.

If you threaten someone atleast stand behind it. You mentioned that I am welcomed to take your AK 74 away from you if I can.

Then you back off and say that you feel that automatics are a waste.

You do know that AK 74's are both automatics and semi and by you not being specific you led others to believe you had the auto make, based on you replying to my post on Autos. Now you want me to believe you have the semi model.

Nothing worse then a internet tough guy who can't even stand their ground.

Ignored.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by mumma in pyjamas

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by mumma in pyjamas
 


That’s not what I meant, we can have a civil discussion, it will turn ugly if you pass laws limiting my freedom, Just like the Nazis do. And I am glad I live in a country where I can keep my guns, cause really you never know when you will need them.



Have you ever heard of Godwins Rule of Nazi Analogies?
www.wisegeek.com...
It is so funny that just last night i was watching QI and they happened to mention Godwin's rule .........


Interesting rule. I've never heard of it before, but I think that it may not apply to this discussion.

I don't know if the poster intended a reference to this or not, but this countries (US) gun control act was taken almost word for word from the Nazi gun control laws.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by Miracle Man
 


Look clown, I wasnt refering to you, I was refering to the no Machine Guns in general.... Do I want to own one, no I think A machine gun is a waste of bullets... One Shot one Kill thats what the army taught us. Not spray and pray.



Hahaha I like this!

Look out for the name calling though!

But what machine guns simply do is channel people and get their heads down so the others can get to work. But yes... way.. too many rounds wasted. Even with a 3 shot burst.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
I have looked and haven't seen what model gun this was. Seems like sensationalism to get more gun rights restricted.

People should have the rights to own a fully automatic gun. If you are scared of one then don't have one, but there are responsible gun owners out there. If you don't want automatic weapons then surely you must be against all guns in general.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ventian
If you don't want automatic weapons then surely you must be against all guns in general.


Thats not a very accurate assumption.

I myself own 8 weapons and enjoy going to the gun range every other weekend to try out differant weapons for future purchase.

Automatic weapons have no purpose other than to kill another human being. You cant hunt with them the only real purpose they have is for suppresant fire and in all honestly you can't tell me joe blow needs a weapon for that.

I can't think of one reason a civilian would need an automatic weapon.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join