Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I prefer a bow anyway. Remember Agincourt you bastards!
"If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss."
chaos0xomega wrote:It's not hard to get a civilian AK modded to fire full auto. Anyone with experience in a machine shop and proper schematics/diagrams can do it. Trust me, I/my friends know... (mega-hint)
And I can duct tape a knife to the end of a broom, and weld scyth blades onto the hubcaps of my car. Whats your point?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Keyasa wrote:I prefer a bow anyway. Remember Agincourt you bastards!
"Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!" Some French guy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/19 18:54:40
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Keyasa wrote:I prefer a bow anyway. Remember Agincourt you bastards!
"Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!" Some French guy.
Gahhh...must resist...hijacking thread into long protracted...Monty Python quoting....help me....
"If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss."
Getting a Concealed Carry Permit in Missouri requires that you take a course approved by your local county's Sheriff's Office.
It is a course you pay for and you receive training and must pass practical tests including shooting and safe weapon handling. I used to live in MO and I looked in to it. I would have taken the course when I got my first handgun.
Now I live in CA, which has some of the most restrictive firearm laws in the nation. The permit to get a handgun isn't too bad though. Any firearms owner worth his salt could pass the tests based on what i've seen [an exam and practical handling test.]
I'm disappointed the CA legislature essentially adopted in to State Law a more stricter version of the old Federal Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons Ban. The CA law basically stops all the loop holes that existed in the old Federal Law [unfortunately.] But CA also banned firearms of .50 caliber too :(
I can always drive over to Nevada for some firearm fun I suppose.
But If I want to get a semi-auto rifle I can always pick up something like an M-14 or a Mini-14 or what have you.
Still, I'd like to get a handgun first. Probably a single action revolver. That is about as safe as you can get when it comes to handguns.
The most important aspects of being a responsible firearm owner is Safety and Law. No responsible firearm owner wants to see someone harmed accidently from their weapons and no responsible firearm owner wants to break the law.
For more on Firearm Law in the US I suggest the two following, ABSOLUTELY FREE, volumes from the BATFE:
As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
quote=Horst]well no sane woman will let you crap on her chest, or suck off a donkey for you, and sometimes you just need to watch gak like that done by professionals.
<<< my hero
KingCracker wrote:
On a funny note tho, a family friend calls women like that rib poppers. Ya just slide it in until they start popping, then you know your there
Roze wrote:As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
It's possible assuming you have the hand strength to deal with the recoil.
It's not exactly safe or accurate.
Waagh! Lagduf Sons of Vulkan Cadian Mountain Division
Great work by the journalist bundling together AK47 and CCW…
"OMG now everyone's gonna carry an -evil assault weapon- CONCEALED! Hide your kids!"
-.-
The "when are you ever…" argument is invalid. But I guess you're fine with restricting sports cars and anything else that travels faster than the maximum speed limit.
I grew up not liking guns and thinking we should get rid of them. I still support if there was a magical ray gun that could get rid of all guns of any types that we should use it. But I also understand that if we ban guns non law abiding people will still have them. Recently I moved to a more country setting. Since then I have purchased a .22 bolt action rifle and I enjoy firing it in my yard. I have looked into getting an AK but the prices are too high for my liking currently.
I have looked into assault rifle laws and what makes an assault rifle one. My understanding was there is a list that our congress made up when they banned assault rifles and these are the items that make up an assault rifle.
Primarily limited to the United States, the term assault weapon is a misnomer used by some to describe a variety of semi-automatic firearms that have certain features generally associated with military assault rifles. The 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired on September 13, 2004, defined the rifle type of assault weapon as a semiautomatic firearm with the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and two or more of the following:
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Conspicuous pistol grip
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
* Grenade launcher
* Barrel shroud
So basically if I have a semi automatic .22 LR with a bayonet mount and a "Conspicuos pistol grip" it is an assault rifle. But if I have a more powerful AK without any of these options it is ok.
Does that make any sense? I mean heaven forbid I want to stab someone with my gun!!!
Also since learning more about guns and talking with other gun owners I think that the there are a few "gun nuts" but most of the gun owners in America are normal people. We need to focus on the people owning illegal guns and the ones who use guns in crimes. AUTOMATIC Life sentence. My one friend got shot 6 times in the back while working at a gas station then the idiots could not open the register so he went over and helped them. These guys are up for parole every 5 years and only got 25 years total. What a crock.
As far as making an AK into a full auto I think that is 10 years federal felony.
I don't believe Federal Law recognizes "Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons" as a class of firearms anymore. The ban is over. And has been for 4+ years.
And yes, a .22 with detachable mag could have been made in to an illegal weapon under the ban. It was something I had to keep in mind when I looked in to upgrading my Ruger 10/22. Especially considering you'd go to jail for a decent chunk of time. You don't want to break a federal firearm law. You especially never want to get caught with an automatic weapon. I really thought the time you did in Jail was 20+ years.
Anyway at the time the easiest way to make a .22 [or any semi-auto really] would have been adding a pistol grip and flash suppressor to the rifle, all upgrades not hard to come by.
There was also a list of weapons which were banned that didn't necessarily conform to the above guidelines, a lot of it was stuff like Tec-9s and other high-cap semi-auto pistols - stuff I like to call "machine pistols" though that isn't exactly a correct term.
You've pretty much hit the hammer on the head in describing why the SA-AWB was a failure in terms of keeping these so called "dangerous" weapons off the street. The fact is they never left the street, or the gun shops for that matter. I guess they could have kept military surplus converted to semi-auto off the street, but I never really understood it either.
A bayonet lug isn't a popular accessory anyway and most would have rather had a muzzle brake than a flash suppressor.
In CA the state ban is essentially the same, except replace "two or more of the following" with "one or more of the following."
detachable] magazine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/20 15:31:06
Waagh! Lagduf Sons of Vulkan Cadian Mountain Division
Yeah the ban is no longer in effect, but that is what it banned.
as far as full auto, you can still buy them used as long as they were produced before 1984( i think is the date) but they also run insane amounts of money because of the scarcity of them. You also need a class III federal weapons license but I think it is only 200$ and it also depends on your state and how they govern it. I heard New Hampshire it is 1000$ a year to posses one.
Lagduf wrote:I don't believe Federal Law recognizes "Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons" as a class of firearms anymore. The ban is over. And has been for 4+ years.
Wait until the next "event" and that will change-hence the big gun and bullet bubble of 2009.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
drakedeming wrote:Yeah the ban is no longer in effect, but that is what it banned.
as far as full auto, you can still buy them used as long as they were produced before 1984( i think is the date) but they also run insane amounts of money because of the scarcity of them. You also need a class III federal weapons license but I think it is only 200$ and it also depends on your state and how they govern it. I heard New Hampshire it is 1000$ a year to posses one.
This information is not entirely correct, but it's pretty much the gist of it.
You are correct that you can get automatic weapons, and yes they are limited to having been made before a certain date [I believe 1984 is the correct year too.]
Please refer to the Federal Firearms Regulations if you want to get have an automatic weapon transferred in to your possession. The $200 you refer to is the "tax stamp" that you must pay to the Gov't to get the weapon from a dealer who has a Class III Federal Firearms License. Technically the person doing the transfer is supposed to pay the tax IIRC, but in practice it's the person taking possession of the weapon who does.
You don't need any particular Federal License to come in to possession of one. There is a lot of Federal paper work you have to fill out and then you have to take in to consideration your local and State laws [in which case a state law might require you to have a FFL.]
So basically, don't get an automatic weapon unless you absolutely, positively, know what you are doing.
I'm not 100% on this, but I think you need to redo paperwork every time you move. So clearly not something you want to get in to until you are clearly settled down. Plus as you stated the the scarcity and rarity of legal automatic weapons increases by year such to the point that they are financially unfeasible to a majority of people. The average person isn't interested in dropping $10K + just to get a firearm that shoots out more than one round when you squeeze the trigger.
Best bet to fire an automatic weapon is to go to range or shooting event that has them and allows the public to fire them [usually for a fee] either that or join the military.
Frazzled wrote:
Lagduf wrote:I don't believe Federal Law recognizes "Semi-Automatic Assault Weapons" as a class of firearms anymore. The ban is over. And has been for 4+ years.
Wait until the next "event" and that will change-hence the big gun and bullet bubble of 2009.
There is no ban coming.
It's all fear mongering by extremists who would like to paint the political scene as something completely black and white where "Democrats/Liberals" seek only to ban guns and "Republicans/Conservatives" will do everything to keep guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.
Thinking like that is absurd and a lot of ignorant people buy in to it. A LOT of people have bought in to it and it's quite sad.
Firearms shops aren't crying though, they're loving the business.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2009/07/21 02:05:42
Waagh! Lagduf Sons of Vulkan Cadian Mountain Division
Marauder wrote:And it's been proven in states with CCW that crime rates go down.
You heard the man on the internet, its been proven! Or possibly crime rates are complex and the causes for crime are highly subjective and constantly changing, so trying to isolate a single factor, particularly one with a fairly trivial effect (compared to major factors such as income distribution or drug use) is near impossible.
Sounds like most people are just jealous of the freedom that the USA gives it's people with the rights to bear arms. Unlike most Country's that take away there peoples right to defend themselves
And now you're just being silly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
pixelpusher wrote:Great work by the journalist bundling together AK47 and CCW…
"OMG now everyone's gonna carry an -evil assault weapon- CONCEALED! Hide your kids!"
The journalist didn't do anything wrong, the CCW permit was the requirement put forward by the truck dealership. I'm guessing the dealership put that requirement in there because of the additional requirements of conceal carry, like the background checks and training courses, not out of any interest in seeing someone conceal carry their AK.
Meanwhile, is there be much value in banning fully automatic weapons from civilians? If you wanted to go on a killing spree, I'd have thought a semi-auto would be more effective. As I understand it full-auto fire is used by militaries to achieve fire supremacy and supress the enemy to allow your own troops to manouvre. I don't see what value that would have for you lone nut.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/21 04:14:42
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Roze wrote:As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
It's possible assuming you have the hand strength to deal with the recoil.
It's not exactly safe or accurate.
Second question:
If you whip your wrist as you fire the gun can you really curve the bullet?
Anuvver fing - when they do sumfing, they try to make it look like somfink else to confuse everybody. When one of them wants to lord it over the uvvers, 'e says "I'm very speshul so'z you gotta worship me", or "I know summink wot you lot don't know, so yer better lissen good". Da funny fing is, arf of 'em believe it and da over arf don't, so 'e 'as to hit 'em all anyway or run fer it.
Roze wrote:As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
It's possible assuming you have the hand strength to deal with the recoil.
It's not exactly safe or accurate.
Second question:
If you whip your wrist as you fire the gun can you really curve the bullet?
Or will you just end up shooting and ear or toe off?
Here is the answer for our gun control issues, simply genius!
"You better hope I can't get no bullets on lay-away!"
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/07/21 04:29:54
Roze wrote:As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
It's possible assuming you have the hand strength to deal with the recoil.
It's not exactly safe or accurate.
Second question:
If you whip your wrist as you fire the gun can you really curve the bullet?
LOL
There is an entire episode of Mythbusters dedicated to this and the answer is a resounding "no" as most would have expected.
Rarely are firearms portrayed with any degree of accuracy in over-the-top action flicks.
Waagh! Lagduf Sons of Vulkan Cadian Mountain Division
which one / ones (if any) are evil assault weapons???
Pic 1.
Pic 2.
Pic 3.
pic 4.
ok... i know what most people are thinking "#2,3 and 4 are scarry looking... they MUST be evil" .... but now its time for the CORRECT answers...
#1 and #2 are the SAME GUN... #2 just has a kit (like the ones JP was talking about) that makes it LOOK different... #1 and #2 are NOT assault rifles. they fire semi autamatic only.
#3 is a semi automatic Wasr-10... it goes from "Safe" to "Fire"... no full auto. #3 is NOT an assualt rifle.
#4 is an ar-15 PISTOL... it fires 9mm and the safty on it goes from "Safe" to "Fire"... #4 is NOT an assault rifle.
now then... i want someone to give me one good reason why i shouldent be able to own any of those that i want to???
You could argue that a Derringer isn't dangerous which is totally ridiculous. Sexy guns though .
Anyway, I can't really see the TRUE difference between ANY of these weapons besides range and stopping power. No one needs a weapon such as an RPG for obvious reasons, but there are a lot of countries AND states that do pretty well with strict gun laws. If you want your artillery piece I could care less, the fact is all I care about is you not being stupid with it. Simple stuff really, but incidents with school shooting say that there are some people that are irresponsible with their weapons (RESPONSIBILITY IS THE CORE OF THE N.R.A. RIGHT?) and there seems to be no way to artificially regulate this.
I don't even like this argument quite frankly, but I know most people have no real need for some of the weapons that they can possess nowadays. If someone wanted they could MAKE weapons through information found by technological means that are FAR more devastating than any mere rifle, assault or not. The main problem here seems to be what is necessary, because there are a lot of people that would argue that automatic weapons should be available for hunting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/21 10:59:18
It's all fear mongering by extremists who would like to paint the political scene as something completely black and white where "Democrats/Liberals" seek only to ban guns and "Republicans/Conservatives" will do everything to keep guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.
Thinking like that is absurd and a lot of ignorant people buy in to it. A LOT of people have bought in to it and it's quite sad.
And you base this on what deep research? The number of restrictive laws proposed or floated by Congress this year, the number of proposals floating by Eric Holder, or the new Supreme court nominee who refused to recognize a right to self defense?
Meanwhile the BATF is calling people who buy 2 9mm pistols in a week in Texas and politely ask if they can interview you and see the pistols.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orkeosaurus wrote:
Lagduf wrote:
Roze wrote:As someone who has no idea where the fact and fiction side of guns differs i really have to ask....Is it at all possible to fire a Big ass hand gun with your hand tilted "super cop style" without it kicking and making you punch yourself in the face?
It's possible assuming you have the hand strength to deal with the recoil.
It's not exactly safe or accurate.
Second question:
If you whip your wrist as you fire the gun can you really curve the bullet?
Of course. Thats segment II in your initial IHAVEAGUNANDNOWIMAPOTENTIALTERRORISTACCORDINGTOTHEGOVERNMENT training course.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2009/07/21 12:35:35
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
.. America arming terrorists ? That's a daft idea, it'd never catch on.
"The GAO notes that being on a terrorist watch list does not mean that someone is involved in any terrorist activity."
..errmmm ? So why have the list in..
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Wrexasaur wrote:Simple stuff really, but incidents with school shooting say that there are some people that are irresponsible with their weapons (RESPONSIBILITY IS THE CORE OF THE N.R.A. RIGHT?) and there seems to be no way to artificially regulate this.
I don't even like this argument quite frankly, but I know most people have no real need for some of the weapons that they can possess nowadays. If someone wanted they could MAKE weapons through information found by technological means that are FAR more devastating than any mere rifle, assault or not. The main problem here seems to be what is necessary, because there are a lot of people that would argue that automatic weapons should be available for hunting.
What are you talking about?
The NRA doesn't doesn't even begin to represent the majority of American firearm owners. PERIOD.
Furthermore no responsible hunter would want to see automatic weapons being able to be used for hunting. It's unsporting but more realistically it doesn't make any sense. If you're hunting for the meat then you wouldn't want your catch riddled with bullets. Hunting is about conservation, not getting your kicks by blowing away some defenseless animal. Those who think otherwise need to reassess their viewpoint and probably get another hobby.
Whether or not people need the weapons they possess is a moot point. The constitution says they can have them. It's a matter of principle.
Frazzled wrote:
And you base this on what deep research? The number of restrictive laws proposed or floated by Congress this year, the number of proposals floating by Eric Holder, or the new Supreme court nominee who refused to recognize a right to self defense?
Meanwhile the BATF is calling people who buy 2 9mm pistols in a week in Texas and politely ask if they can interview you and see the pistols.
And still nothing has come to pass. The American public is far more interested in Congress dealing with the economic situation and items like healthcare reform.
You can always tell the BATFE no [unless you have a legal automatic weapon of course ]
reds8n wrote:
your initial IHAVEAGUNANDNOWIMAPOTENTIALTERRORISTACCORDINGTOTHEGOVERNMENT training course.
Envy89 wrote:which one / ones (if any) are evil assault weapons???
Pic 1.
Pic 2.
Pic 3.
pic 4.
ok... i know what most people are thinking "#2,3 and 4 are scarry looking... they MUST be evil" .... but now its time for the CORRECT answers...
#1 and #2 are the SAME GUN... #2 just has a kit (like the ones JP was talking about) that makes it LOOK different... #1 and #2 are NOT assault rifles. they fire semi autamatic only.
#3 is a semi automatic Wasr-10... it goes from "Safe" to "Fire"... no full auto. #3 is NOT an assualt rifle.
#4 is an ar-15 PISTOL... it fires 9mm and the safty on it goes from "Safe" to "Fire"... #4 is NOT an assault rifle.
now then... i want someone to give me one good reason why i shouldent be able to own any of those that i want to???
Assault Weapon refers to firearms that had been developed from earlier fully-automatic firearms into semi-automatic civilian-legal versions. Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent casing and load the next round into the chamber, ready to fire again; they do not fire automatically like a machine gun, rather, only 1 shot comes from each trigger pull.
By former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, all non-automatic AK-47s, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of features from the following list of features:
A semi-automatic AK-47 rifle.
An Intratec TEC-DC9 with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an Assault Weapon under Federal Law.
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Pistol grip
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
* Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
* Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
* Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
* Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
* Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
* A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Pistol grip
* Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
* Detachable magazine
Under the old law they are all assault weapons.
Currently there is no real definition of an assault weapon though since there is no law.
A model with an assault weapon may charge as normally after firing.
Anuvver fing - when they do sumfing, they try to make it look like somfink else to confuse everybody. When one of them wants to lord it over the uvvers, 'e says "I'm very speshul so'z you gotta worship me", or "I know summink wot you lot don't know, so yer better lissen good". Da funny fing is, arf of 'em believe it and da over arf don't, so 'e 'as to hit 'em all anyway or run fer it.
drakedeming wrote:Under the old law they are all assault weapons.
cept for #1 and #4... under the old law #2 and 3 would be.
#2 has a kit that magicaly turns it into an "Evil" weapon useing pixy dust and candy rainbows.
#4 looks like only bad men use it, as such the pixy dust need not be used on it.
drakedeming wrote:Currently there is no real definition of an assault weapon though since there is no law.
the key is full auto.
but to play it safe i am picking up odds and ends that i know will be banned if the nut jobs have their way with the constution.... things like folding stocks, standard cap mags (mostly 30 rounders), ptisol grips, spikey bits, ect, ect.... o, and i am keeping my eye on a 75 round drumb for my ak.... be able to shoot all day with that.
stuff i can pick up now for 20$ a pop, then if or when a ban comes back in place i could sell for much more then that
Whether or not people need the weapons they possess is a moot point. The constitution says they can have them. It's a matter of principle.
Doesn't the constitution say that in terms of the 18th century, when we had just got out of a war with England??? I think the constitution argument is a moot point as well.
I am not personally trying to take your guns, so please don't make this a flame war...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/22 01:01:06
Whether or not people need the weapons they possess is a moot point. The constitution says they can have them. It's a matter of principle.
Doesn't the constitution say that in terms of the 18th century, when we had just got out of a war with England??? I think the constitution argument is a moot point as well.
Yeah, but except for the later amendments, the constitution says everything in terms of the 18th century. This is a really good point though! The second amendment is silly and outdated! The founding fathers only wanted citizens to have muzzle-loading weapons. Personally I think things like freedom of speech and religion are outdated too. Everyone knows how dangerous and disruptive things like religion and free speech are, I mean look at all the wars that have been fought over religion, for instance the Crusades! Freedom of the press could really be done away with too, that sort of thing is too divisive in our glorious nation. Look at the kind of damage that was caused to our reputation when the Abu Graib story broke! Everyone would have been much happier if no one ever heard that story! The founding fathers never intended our press to be carrying around things like cameras and microphones, so people could actually watch and hear what people were doing in far off places! They couldn't even imagine that sort of technology! I mean, our government is here to serve the people, how can they do that efficiently if we have all these frivolous, outdated liberties?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2009/07/22 01:15:01
You just won this thread.
]
