BTW, did anyone know there are no laws regulating or prohibiting flamethrowers? Nothing says “stopping power” like a squirt of 2,200 degree Fahrenheit flaming jellied gasoline.
What I absolutely must have is the freedom to make that choice myself. Without that, we have tyranny.
Any firearm I can carry will still weigh a damn sight less than any cop I could carry.
I wonder if anyone has every come out of a firefight or self defensive shooting situation thinking: “I wish I hadn’t had so many rounds of ammunition.”
How big are the guns that the bad guys are carrying?
That big.
If the mere fact of Al Quaeda HAVING something is sufficient to move the Pentagon to action, then you or I should not have it. For example, Al Quaeda just having nuclear weapons or anthrax or shoulder-fired AA weapons will move Uncle Sam to act. On the other hand, AQ could have as many machineguns, as many silenced weapons, as many switchblade knives or street-sweepers as it wants and Uncle Sam wouldn't really give a rat's ass. Why should he give a rat's ass over one of us owning any such? Are we less trustworthy than AQ??
The Senator fired back: "The Second Amendment has no limits on firepower."
The perfect answer - please support her Repeal SAFE ACT petition.
She has 60,000 signatures thus far
www.nysenate.gov/webform/stand-second-amendment-standing-new-york- state-senator-kathleen-marchione
i really don’t care what other people think i should have. and i also don’t care what kind or how big their guns are, if they own any. it’s nobody else’s business.
As big as you can handle!
If your gun has wheels to move it, it just might be too big.
Antique rollers excepted.
As soon as you respond to the troll “Why do you need...” you’ve lost right there. No different than the old “When did you stop abusing your wife?”
My response is: “Why the hell are you to define what I need and don’t need? Let’s go over to your house and *I’ll* decide what *you* don’t need and take it off your hands. How does that sound?”
AS BIG OF A GUN AS ONE WISHES TO PURCHASE!
Currently, the question is how much firepower can I conceal. Once we get Open Carry this .32 will live out its life in my sock drawer and I'll carry my Ranch Hand .45 Colt. It only holds 7 rounds but they are 300gr @ 1050 fps so the need to Double Tap drops making an effective mag of 14.
"How much firepower does anyone need?"
When asked why he carried a .45 the old Texas Ranger said "Because the don't make a .46."
I can tow a 75mm Pack Howitzer behind my car but it would affect the Harly's handling too much.
.88 Magnum.
Left-hand Gun of Navarone.
Something big enough to shoot school buses into orbit.
“Planet-smasher superlaser” for my new Death Star.
That’d be a good start.
Dunno. I keep feeling the need for a 20mm anti-tank rifle, myself, say a Lahti. Or maybe a 14.5mm PTRS-41.
The Choom Gang must not be allowed to dictate to the Boom Gang...
It’s not a matter of weapon size. The Constitution says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. The sentence ends there. There are no qualifiers.
It's not a throwdown that Madison was correct here about the shoving match between federal and state governments, by the way. The Civil War gave these ideas a severe test, and a lot of people would say that the answer was "FAIL".
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors.
For your information.
It certainly sounds like Madison is talking about us, doesn't it?