Actually, you and she are incorrect. We have the right to bear the same arms that are in use by the military no matter what time period it is. This is the intent of the Second Amendment. This was also defined in US vs. Miller circa 1939 USSC.
And yes, we do have the right to a bazooka and rocket launchers. The line should be drawn at the point of indeterminate area effect weapons. What these consist of are weapons that once fired and detonated, we no longer have control over their destructive purpose due to fallout or residual effects. This includes chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, and biological weapons.
The reason I bring this up is that we not only have the right to own these weapons but the duty and responsibility to do so for defense of our nation. Remember that the mainland US was not attacked in WW2 by the Japanese specifically because they knew that the citizens are armed.
My personal feeling on the issue is that anyone that promotes bans of any kind is subverting the US Constitution, is a traitor, and should be either jailed or deported immediately and permanently.
Mike
90+% of Americans disagree with you.
My personal feeling on the issue is that anyone that promotes bans of any kind is subverting the US Constitution, is a traitor, and should be either jailed or deported immediately and permanently.
Whatever, you sound like a total whackjob. That kind of ridiculous hyperbole is what allows the media to continue to successfully portray gun rights advocates as scary nuts. Anytime we get close to getting rid of the myth, some idiot like you pipes up.
“And yes, we do have the right to a bazooka and rocket launchers. The line should be drawn at the point of indeterminate area effect weapons. What these consist of are weapons that once fired and detonated, we no longer have control over their destructive purpose due to fallout or residual effects. This includes chemical weapons, nuclear weapons, and biological weapons.”
Mike, based on what? Can you cite your sources, link to your founders, provide the laws that make it so. Can you show me the legal opinions that support your view? If you cannot then all you are providing is opinion, not constitutional fact.