Fully automatic machine guns were, of course, effectively banned in 1934
????? - More like heavily regulated - but anyone who has the time and money can buy them legally.
"Effectively banned" is more correct. There is only one such gun for every 1000 citizens, so "anyone" may get them as long as not too many "anyones" wish to. The $200 fee is minor, but the need for permission of your stubborn local police chief is an effective ban for many people, perhaps most of the population if you consider the number of citizens prohibited by state-wide bans.
Then, the price. A $10,000 price tag on something that costs $500 to manufacture is an "effective ban" for most citizens, because something that is made cost-prohibitive by government mandate is "effectively banned."
Worst of all, modern rifles have been FULLY banned. Now, and for the duration of our republic, citizens will never have access to rifles made or designed after 1986. Today, a 30-year-old rifle might not be very obsolete, but in future generations, it may make a substantial difference.
And to those who say "but my accurate scoped rifle is more useful against tyranny than a clumsy machine gun", I ask "why do you think that most soldiers carry machine guns, and not sniper rifles?"
posted on 08/09/2004 7:45:00 AM PDT
by Atlas Sneezed
(Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
We appreciate your observations, and agree. May we add this thought: Carefully aimed semi-automatic rifle fire, delivered by brave and determined men can prove decisive. The U.S. Army marched from Normandy to Berlin into the teeth of fully-automatic fire from MP-40s. Most of our grunts carried 8-round Garands. A good eye, ammo discipline and grim-a&& determination will win the day.
posted on 08/09/2004 8:35:41 AM PDT
((When police break the law, there is no law..... Just a fight for survival - Billy Jack)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson