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.

SOFDC wrote:Additionally, as far as I am aware they do not care how it is carried, at least as far as land transport goes (Aside from the typical regulations on displaying weapons openly/loaded/etc.)

There may be a distinction between firing mounts and simply having a gun in, or on, a car. Though I imagine the issue of Americans constructing their own technicals is fairly small.

Similarly, the concern regarding, say, 120 mm smooth bore cannons is neatly handled by their prodigious cost (in short, the people that can afford them probably have little need to revolt). And, as far as I know, its relatively difficult to acquire Russian RPGs in most of this country. But, even if there isn't, very little practical use exists for a weapon; making it sort of like owning a broadsword.

Oh, it's easier to build a cannon than you might think.

What exactly is a sawed of shotgun used to hunt? I'm all for guns, i just don't see a need for a fully automatic assault rifle to go deer hunt. .

To be perfectly blunt...and I am not trying to be a <CENSORED> here...but from a second amendment standpoint I think the people arguing for the right to keep a deer rifle are on even shakier footing than the people trying to own machine guns. It does not, except peripherally, imply anything about hunting deer. Hunting people perhaps, but not deer. If any weapons -are- protected under it, it would be the militaristic ones.

There may be a distinction between firing mounts and simply having a gun in, or on, a car.

I concede this possibility at a state/local level, but as far as federal goes, I can find nothing. Absolutely nothing.

And, as far as I know, its relatively difficult to acquire Russian RPGs in most of this country. But, even if there isn't, very little practical use exists for a weapon

RPGs are difficult to obtain merely because so few were imported before the doors closed. The last one I saw for sale hovered somewhere around 3k USD. In most states, provided you fill out the proper form and pay your tax, you could take the blueprints and a machine shop and build one for yourself A-OK. Things like M203s are far cheaper at 1800+/-, and unlike the RPG which you noted is not a very practical item, has far more uses in the form of tear gas which IS legal, and buckshot-esque ammunition.

Monster Rain wrote:Oh, it's easier to build a cannon than you might think.

No doubt, the problem is building one that's useful, along with ammunition that is similarly useful.

Useful is a relative term, but I see what you're saying.

Enemy armor! Deploy the spud gun!